Hicks v. Buitron et al
| Quentin J. Hicks |
| Oswego County, New York, Donald H. Dodd, Steven C. Buitron and Gregory Oaks |
| 6:2012cv01841 |
| December 17, 2012 |
| US District Court for the Northern District of New York |
| Utica Office |
| Jefferson |
| Therese Wiley Dancks |
| Gary L. Sharpe |
| 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
11
MEMORANDUM-DECISION AND ORDER: It is ORDERED that Magistrate Judge Therese Wiley Dancks' # 7 Report-Recommendation is REJECTED IN PART and ADOPTED IN PART as follows: REJECTED with respect to the recommendation of dismissal ofall claims agains t Buitron without leave to amend, and ADOPTED in all other respects. It is further ORDERED that the claims against Buitron and the County of Oswego are DISMISSED with leave to amend within 30 days of this Memorandum-Decision and Order. It is further ORDERED that the claims against Oakes and Dodd are DISMISSED without leave to amend. It is further ORDERED that if Hicks fails to file an Amended Complaint within 30 days of the date of this Memorandum-Decision and Order, the Clerk is directed to close this case without further order of the court. Signed by Chief Judge Gary L. Sharpe on 5/22/2014. [Copy served upon pro se plaintiff via regular mail.] (nmk)
|
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 Northern 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.
