Mallgren v. Burkholder
Anthony Brian Mallgren |
Page Burkholder |
1:2014cv02709 |
April 30, 2014 |
US District Court for the Eastern District of New York |
Brooklyn Office |
Lois Bloom |
Margo K. Brodie |
Civil Rights: Other |
28 U.S.C. ยง 1331 Federal Question: Other Civil Rights |
Plaintiff |
Available Case Documents
The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:
Document Text |
---|
Filing 5 MEMORANDUM & ORDER: The Court grants Plaintiff's requests to proceed in forma pauperis pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915. The Court finds that the six above-captioned Complaints allege overlapping claims related to Plaintiff 039;s involuntary commitment to a mental health facility. As no purpose would be served by litigating the Complaints separately, the Court directs that the actions be consolidated under docket number, No. 14-CV-2189. The other actions, No. 14-CV-2188, No. 14-CV-2709, No. 14-CV-2735, No. 14-CV-2736, and No. 14-CV-3536, shall be administratively closed. Plaintiff's claims against the New York State Office of the Attorney General and Richmond University Medical Center are dismissed pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B), as are all claims related to medical records. Plaintiff shall have 30 days from the date of this Order to file an amended complaint. The amended complaint must be captioned, "Amended Complaint," and shall be filed under docket No. 14-CV-2189. All further proceedings shall be stayed for 30 days. Should Plaintiff wish to abandon his claims related to involuntary commitment and involuntary treatment, he may notify the Court or simply decide not to file an amended complaint within the 30 days provided for amendment. Plaintiff's 6/4/2014 motion seeking consolidation of multiple cases he filed in the Northern District of New York and this Court is granted in part, to the extent that No. 14-CV-219 (N.D.N.Y.), No. 14-CV-273 (N.D.N.Y.), and No. 14-CV-2735 (E.D.N.Y.) are now consolidated, along with the three other above-captioned actions. Plaintiff's request to consolidate the other cases is denied. In addition, Plaintiff must show cause, by written affirmation, within 30 days of the date of this Memorandum and Order, why th e Court should not issue an injunction barring him from filing any future frivolous complaints seeking in forma pauperis status. The Court certifies pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3) that any appeal would not be taken in good fai th and therefore in forma pauperis status is denied for purpose of an appeal. SO ORDERED by Judge Margo K. Brodie, on 8/5/2014. C/mailed to pro se Plaintiff. (Cases associated. Civil Case Terminated.) (Latka-Mucha, Wieslawa) (Latka-Mucha, Wieslawa) |
Use the links below to access additional information about this case on the US Court's PACER system. A subscription to PACER is required.
Access this case on the New York Eastern District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System
- Search for Party Aliases
- Associated Cases
- Attorneys
- Case File Location
- Case Summary
- Docket Report
- History/Documents
- Parties
- Related Transactions
- Check Status
Search for this case: Mallgren v. Burkholder | |
---|---|
Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
Search Web | [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ] |
Defendant: Page Burkholder | |
Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
Search Finance | [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ] |
Search Web | [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ] |
Plaintiff: Anthony Brian Mallgren | |
Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
Search Finance | [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ] |
Search Web | [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ] |
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.