Nelson v. Dougherty et al
| Dennis Nelson |
| Brian Dougherty, Sandra Martin-Karas and Carl J. Koenigsmann |
| 9:2010cv01568 |
| December 28, 2010 |
| US District Court for the Northern District of New York |
| Prisoner Office |
| Oneida |
| David E. Peebles |
| David N. Hurd |
| Civil Rights |
| 42 U.S.C. ยง 1983 |
| 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
35
DECISION AND ORDER: ORDERED, that Magistrate Judge Peebles' August 13, 2012 Report and Recommendation (Dkt. No. 33 ) is ADOPTED in its entirety for the reasons stated therein. ORDERED, that Plaintiff's in forma pauperis status is REVO KED. ORDERED, that Plaintiff shall pay the required $350 statutory filing fee within THIRTY (30) DAYS of the date of this Decision and Order if he wishes to proceed with this action. ORDERED, that if Plaintiff fails to pay the $350 statu tory filing fee within THIRTY (30) DAYS of the date of this Decision and Order, the Clerk of the Court shall enter judgment in Defendants' favor and close this case without further order of the Court. ORDERED, that substantive portions of De fendants' motion for summary judgment (Dkt. No. 25 ) is DENIED without prejudice to renew in the event that Plaintiff pays the statutory filing fee. Signed by U.S. District Judge Mae A. D'Agostino on 9/12/12. (served on non-ecf party by regular mail) (alh, )
|
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.
