Dougherty v. County of Suffolk et al
| William Dougherty |
| John 2:13cv6493 Doe, John and Jane 2:13cv6493 Doe, County of Suffolk, Suffolk County Sheriff's Office and Jane Torrez |
| 2:2013cv06493 |
| November 22, 2013 |
| US District Court for the Eastern District of New York |
| Central Islip Office |
| Joanna Seybert |
| A. Kathleen Tomlinson |
| Civil Rights: Other |
| 42 U.S.C. ยง 1983 Civil Rights Act |
| 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
95
ORDER granting 78 Motion in Limine. SEE ATTACHED ORDER. Ordered by Magistrate Judge A. Kathleen Tomlinson on 4/20/2018. (Tomlinson, A.)
|
|
Filing
60
MEMORANDUM & ORDER denying 49 Motion for Summary Judgment; granting 50 Motion for Summary Judgment; Since the availability of administrative remedies is a mixed question of law and fact, a hearing is necessary to determine whether administrati ve remedies were available to Plaintiff. Defendants are therefore directed to inform the Court on or before August 15, 2016, whether they intend to waive their exhaustion argument, or if they wish to participate in a factual hearing to resolve the i ssue. Defendants' motion for summary judgment (Docket Entry 49) is thus DENIED WITHOUT PREJUDICE and will be reinstated if Defendants prevail following the hearing. In addition, Defendants' request to substitute an exhibit (Docket Entry 50) is GRANTED. So Ordered by Judge Joanna Seybert on 7/25/2016. C/ECF (Valle, Christine)
|
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.
