Crenshaw v. Wright et al
| William Crenshaw |
| Ali Syed and Mikhail Gusman |
| 9:2010cv00244 |
| March 3, 2010 |
| US District Court for the Northern District of New York |
| Prisoner Office |
| XX US, Outside State |
| George H. Lowe |
| Gary L. Sharpe |
| Prisoner: Civil Rights |
| 42 U.S.C. ยง 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights |
| Both |
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
37
ORDER granting Defendants' motion for summary judgment as to defendant Levitt, and to change venue as to defendants Syed and Gusman 17 . Plaintiff's claims against defendant Levitt are dismissed. Plaintiff's remaining claims against defendants Syed and Gusman are transferred to the United States District Court for the Northern District of New York. Plaintiff's motions for appointment of counsel 25 28 and to appoint an expert 34 are denied.Plaintiff's motion for leave to file a supplemental complaint 33 is denied, without prejudice to plaintiff's filing a new complaint in this district asserting those claims. ***CLERK TO FOLLOW UP. Signed by Hon. David G. Larimer on 2/16/10. (EMA)[Transferred from New York Western on 3/3/2010.]
|
|
Filing
8
DECISION AND ORDER re 7 Amended Complaint granting plaintiff one last opportunity to amend the complaint. Plaintiff is granted leave to file a second amended complaint regarding only his claims of deliberate indifference against those unnamed defen dants whom he will have to identify in the second amended complaint, and Dr. Ali Syed, as directed in the order by 8/30/09. In event the plaintiff fails to file second amended compliant by 8/30/09, the action will be dismissed with prejudice without further order of the Court. The Clerk of the Court is directed to send a copy of this order, original complaint, amended complaint, a blank §1983 complaint form with instructions for preparing an Amended Complaint to the plaintiff. The Court her eby certifies, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a), that any appeal from this Order would not be taken in good faith and leave to appeal to the Court of Appeals as a poor person is denied. Coppedge v. United States, 369 U.S. 438 (1962). Further requ ests to proceed on appeal in forma pauperis should be directed on motion to the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit in accordance with Rule 24 of the Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure. Plaintiff's claims against defendants Wright, Fischer, Miller, Kirkpatrick, Bennett, Conway, Poole, Artus, and Graham are dismissed with prejudice and the Clerk is directed to terminate these defendants as parties to the action. Signed by Hon. Richard J. Arcara on 7/27/09. (RE)[Transferred from New York Western on 3/3/2010.]
|
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.
