Sylla v. Ruh

Sylla v. Ruh

Plaintiff:	Damantang Sylla
Defendant:	Inspector Peter Ruh
Case Number:	2:2010cv03325
Filed:	July 15, 2010
Court:	US District Court for the Eastern District of New York
Office:	Central Islip Office
Presiding Judge:	Joseph F. Bianco
Presiding Judge:	William D. Wall
Nature of Suit:	Forfeit/Penalty: Other
Cause of Action:	28 U.S.C. § 1341 Complaint for Forfeiture
Jury Demanded By:	Plaintiff

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
July 16, 2013	Filing 70 ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS. For the reasons set forth herein, having conducted a review of the full record and the applicable law, and having reviewed the R&R for clear error, the Court adopts the findings and recommendations contained in the well-reasoned and thorough R&R in their entirety. Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that defendant Ruh's motion for summary judgment is granted and plaintiff's cross motion for summary judgment is denied. The Clerk of the Court shal l enter judgment accordingly and close the case. 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; therefore, in forma pauperis status is denied for purposes of an appeal. SO ORDERED. Ordered by Judge Joseph F. Bianco on 7/16/2013. (Samplin, Ilissa)
September 24, 2012	Filing 49 ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS: The R&R is adopted in its entirety, and plaintiff Sylla may file an amended complaint consistent with this order by 10/26/12. Summary judgment is granted as to plaintiff Nabe, and plaintiff Nabe is dismisse d as a plaintiff in this case. Summary judgment is granted as to plaintiff Sylla's 4 amendment claims. Plaintiffs motion for summary judgment is denied. In order for plaintiff Sylla to proceed in this action by attempting to allege a Bivens c laim or FTCA claim, plaintiff Sylla must file an amended complaint by 10/26/12. Failure to an amended complaint will result in the dismissal of this action with prejudice. If deft wishes to make a second motion for summary judgment after the filin g of the amended complaint, the Court will set a schedule for a second motion at the appropriate time. Doc #34 granted/denied in part; #35 denied; #37 denied. Ordered by Judge Joseph F. Bianco on 9/24/2012. (Bollbach, Jean) cm by chambers to pro se by fcm on 9/24/12

Date Filed

Document Text

July 16, 2013

Filing 70 ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS. For the reasons set forth herein, having conducted a review of the full record and the applicable law, and having reviewed the R&R for clear error, the Court adopts the findings and recommendations contained in the well-reasoned and thorough R&R in their entirety. Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that defendant Ruh's motion for summary judgment is granted and plaintiff's cross motion for summary judgment is denied. The Clerk of the Court shal l enter judgment accordingly and close the case. 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; therefore, in forma pauperis status is denied for purposes of an appeal. SO ORDERED. Ordered by Judge Joseph F. Bianco on 7/16/2013. (Samplin, Ilissa)

September 24, 2012

Filing 49 ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS: The R&R is adopted in its entirety, and plaintiff Sylla may file an amended complaint consistent with this order by 10/26/12. Summary judgment is granted as to plaintiff Nabe, and plaintiff Nabe is dismisse d as a plaintiff in this case. Summary judgment is granted as to plaintiff Sylla's 4 amendment claims. Plaintiffs motion for summary judgment is denied. In order for plaintiff Sylla to proceed in this action by attempting to allege a Bivens c laim or FTCA claim, plaintiff Sylla must file an amended complaint by 10/26/12. Failure to an amended complaint will result in the dismissal of this action with prejudice. If deft wishes to make a second motion for summary judgment after the filin g of the amended complaint, the Court will set a schedule for a second motion at the appropriate time. Doc #34 granted/denied in part; #35 denied; #37 denied. Ordered by Judge Joseph F. Bianco on 9/24/2012. (Bollbach, Jean) cm by chambers to pro se by fcm on 9/24/12

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: Sylla v. Ruh
Search News	[ Google News \| Marketwatch \| Wall Street Journal \| Financial Times \| New York Times ]
Search Web	[ Unicourt \| Legal Web \| Google \| Bing \| Yahoo \| Ask ]
Defendant: Inspector Peter Ruh
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: Damantang Sylla
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?