Kuar v. Mawn

Kuar v. Mawn

Plaintiff:	Shawn M. Kuar
Defendant:	Michael P. Mawn
Case Number:	2:2008cv04401
Filed:	October 30, 2008
Court:	US District Court for the Eastern District of New York
Office:	Prisoner: Civil Rights Office
County:	Suffolk
Presiding Judge:	Joseph F. Bianco
Presiding Judge:	E. Thomas Boyle
Nature of Suit:	Plaintiff
Cause of Action:	Federal Question
Jury Demanded By:	42:1983 Prisoner Civil Rights

Follow case documents by RSS

Available Case Documents

The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:

Date Filed	Document Text
September 4, 2012	Filing 82 ORDER denying 74 Motion to Dismiss for Lack of Prosecution; denying 78 Motion to Dismiss for Lack of Prosecution; denying 79 Motion to Take Deposition from Shawn M. Kuar. For the reasons set forth in the attached Memorandum and Order, IT I S HEREBY ORDERED that Mawn's motion to dismiss is denied without prejudice to renewal. Plaintiff shall file with the Court by October 31, 2012 a copy of the application that he filed with the Secretary of the Department of Homeland Security for written consent to grant the plaintiff permission to reapply for admission to the United States. In the alternative, plaintiff may retain an attorney and have that attorney file a notice of appearance in this case on plaintiff's behalf by Oct ober 31, 2012. If plaintiff takes neither of these actions by October 31, 2012, this action will be dismissed with prejudice for failure to prosecute upon letter motion by the defendant. Discovery is stayed. Plaintiff's motion to take his deposition by telephone is denied without prejudice to renew his application at a later date. SO ORDERED. Ordered by Judge Joseph F. Bianco on 9/4/2012. (O'Neil, Jacquelyn)
March 4, 2011	Filing 66 ORDER granting 52 Motion to Dismiss; granting in part and denying in part 54 Motion to Dismiss; granting in part and denying in part 58 Motion to Dismiss. For the reasons set forth in the attached Memorandum and Order, the Court dismisses the claims against defendant Price on the ground of absolute immunity. The Clerk of the Court shall terminate Price as a party to this action. As to defendant Mawn's motion to dismiss, the Court grants the motion to dismiss plaintiff's Eighth Amendment claims, but denies defendant Mawn's motion in all other respects. However, as set forth in this Memorandum and Order, the Court precludes plaintiff from relying on certain factual assertions that are clearly contradictory to statements that were made by plaintiff during his plea allocution and were adopted by the state court in accepting plaintiff's plea. Ordered by Judge Joseph F. Bianco on 3/4/2011. (Graves, Kelly)

Date Filed

Document Text

September 4, 2012

Filing 82 ORDER denying 74 Motion to Dismiss for Lack of Prosecution; denying 78 Motion to Dismiss for Lack of Prosecution; denying 79 Motion to Take Deposition from Shawn M. Kuar. For the reasons set forth in the attached Memorandum and Order, IT I S HEREBY ORDERED that Mawn's motion to dismiss is denied without prejudice to renewal. Plaintiff shall file with the Court by October 31, 2012 a copy of the application that he filed with the Secretary of the Department of Homeland Security for written consent to grant the plaintiff permission to reapply for admission to the United States. In the alternative, plaintiff may retain an attorney and have that attorney file a notice of appearance in this case on plaintiff's behalf by Oct ober 31, 2012. If plaintiff takes neither of these actions by October 31, 2012, this action will be dismissed with prejudice for failure to prosecute upon letter motion by the defendant. Discovery is stayed. Plaintiff's motion to take his deposition by telephone is denied without prejudice to renew his application at a later date. SO ORDERED. Ordered by Judge Joseph F. Bianco on 9/4/2012. (O'Neil, Jacquelyn)

March 4, 2011

Filing 66 ORDER granting 52 Motion to Dismiss; granting in part and denying in part 54 Motion to Dismiss; granting in part and denying in part 58 Motion to Dismiss. For the reasons set forth in the attached Memorandum and Order, the Court dismisses the claims against defendant Price on the ground of absolute immunity. The Clerk of the Court shall terminate Price as a party to this action. As to defendant Mawn's motion to dismiss, the Court grants the motion to dismiss plaintiff's Eighth Amendment claims, but denies defendant Mawn's motion in all other respects. However, as set forth in this Memorandum and Order, the Court precludes plaintiff from relying on certain factual assertions that are clearly contradictory to statements that were made by plaintiff during his plea allocution and were adopted by the state court in accepting plaintiff's plea. Ordered by Judge Joseph F. Bianco on 3/4/2011. (Graves, Kelly)

Access additional case information on PACER

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 this case: Kuar v. Mawn
Search News	[ Google News \| Marketwatch \| Wall Street Journal \| Financial Times \| New York Times ]
Search Web	[ Unicourt \| Legal Web \| Google \| Bing \| Yahoo \| Ask ]
Plaintiff: Shawn M. Kuar
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 ]
Defendant: Michael P. Mawn
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.

Why Is My Information Online?