Golub v. Swaaley et al
| Dr. J. David Golub |
| Norman J. Golub, Jack Stern and Michael L. Swaaley |
| Richmond County Surrogate Court |
| 1:2016cv05386 |
| September 26, 2016 |
| US District Court for the Eastern District of New York |
| Brooklyn Office |
| Lois Bloom |
| Eric N. Vitaliano |
| Real Property: Other |
| 28 U.S.C. ยง 1331 Fed. Question |
| Plaintiff |
Follow case documents by RSS
Available Case Documents
The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing
41
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER BARRING FURTHER LITIGATION ORDER, Plaintiff Golub's Motion To Vacate the Mandate and Extend the Time in which to Appeal (Doc. No. 38) and Motion for Leave to Vacate 11.13.2020 Order (Doc. No. 39) are denied. Golub is enjoi ned from filing any new documents in this case and any new actions in this district without first obtaining leave of the Court. The Clerk of Court is directed not to file but to immediately return to Golub any documents that are received from him without an application seeking leave to file. So Ordered by Judge Roslynn R. Mauskopf on 9/30/2021. (Lee, Tiffeny)
|
|
Filing
35
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE: Accordingly, it is ORDERED: Golub's motion to stay these proceedings is moot, since he has already filed another Rule 59 motion and a notice of appeal. Golub's motions pursuant to Rules 59 and 60 of the F ederal Rules of Civil Procedure are denied for the same reasons explained in the Court's Memoranda and Orders dated September 26, 2018; September 27, 2019; and September 29, 2020. Golub shall show cause in an affirmation to be filed within 30 da ys of the date of this Memorandum and Order why he should not be enjoined from filing any further documents in this action (except for documents directed to the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit) and from filing any further action s in this district without prior Court approval. If Golub fails to submit an affirmation within the time allowed, or if his affirmation does not set forth good cause why this injunction should not be entered, he will be barred from filing any furthe r submissions in this case (except for documents directed to the Second Circuit) and any further actions in this district without prior Court approval. In light of Golub's history of vexatious litigation, his applications to file papers electron ically with the Court are denied. Although Golub has consented to electronic notification, the Clerk of Court is directed to mail a copy of this Memorandum and Order and Order to Show Cause to Golub and to note the mailing on the docket. Ordered by Chief Judge Roslynn R. Mauskopf on 11/13/2020. (Taronji, Robert)
|
|
Filing
27
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER denying 23 Motion to Vacate: For the reasons set forth in the attached Memorandum and Order, plaintiff Golub's second motion for reconsideration is denied. Although Golub paid the filing fee to initiate the action, the Court certifies pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3) that any appeal from this Order would not be taken in good faith, and therefore, in forma pauperis status is denied for purpose of an appeal. Although pro se plai ntiff has consented to electronic notification, the Clerk of Court is respectfully directed to mail a copy of this Memorandum and Order to plaintiff and note the mailing on the docket. Ordered by Judge Roslynn R. Mauskopf on 9/27/2019. (Mauskopf, Roslynn)
|
|
Filing
22
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER denying 20 Motion to Vacate: For the reasons set forth in the attached Memorandum and Order, Golub's motion for reconsideration pursuant to Rule 59(e) and Rule 60(b) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure is denied, and Golub's request to amend his complaint is denied as futile (Doc. Nos. 19, 20.) Although Golub paid the filing fee to initiate the action, the Court certifies pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3) that any appeal from this Order would not be taken in good faith, and therefore, in forma pauperis status is denied for purpose of an appeal. The Clerk of Court is respectfully directed to mail a copy of this Memorandum and Order to pro se plaintiff Dr. J. David Golub, and note the mailing on the docket. Ordered by Judge Roslynn R. Mauskopf on 9/26/2018. (Mauskopf, Roslynn)
|
|
Filing
16
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER: Golubs request for injunctive relief is denied and the action is dismissed for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(h)(3). Any state law claims are dismissed without prejudice. Although Golub paid the filing f ee to initiate the action, the Court certifies pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3) that any appeal from this Order would not be taken in good faith, and therefore, in forma pauperis status is denied for purpose of an appeal. See Coppedg e v. United States, 369 U.S. 438, 444-45 (1962). The Clerk of Court is respectfully directed to enter judgment, mail a copy of this Memorandum and Order and the accompanying Judgment to plaintiff Dr. J. David Golub, pro se, note the mailing on the docket, and close this case. Ordered by Judge Roslynn R. Mauskopf on 9/6/2017. (Taronji, Robert)
|
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
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.
