Carpenter v. Apple et al
| Gina Carpenter |
| Craig Apple, Albany County Sheriff's Office, County of Albany, Albany County Correctional Facility, Augustus Roberson, III, Jane Doe and John Doe |
| 9:2015cv01269 |
| October 22, 2015 |
| US District Court for the Northern District of New York |
| Prisoner Office |
| Rensselaer |
| Christian F. Hummel |
| Glenn T. Suddaby |
| 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
87
ORDER: ORDERED, that defendant Apple's Motion for a Stay of discovery and dispositive motion deadlines as it relates to defendant Apple is GRANTED (Dkt. No. 75 , 84 ), and plaintiff's letter motion requesting the Court deny such stay is DENIED (Dkt. No. 81 ). Signed by Magistrate Judge Christian F. Hummel on 9/29/17. (alh, )
|
|
Filing
69
DECISION AND ORDER granting in part and denying in part # 43 Defendant Apple's Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings. The following claims against Defendant Apple are dismissed: (a) the First, Second, and Third causes of action against Defenda nt Apple in his official capacity; and (b) the Fourth, Ninth, Tenth, Eleventh, and Twelfth causes of action. The following claims survive: the First, Second, and Third causes of action against Defendant Apple in his individual capacity. Signed by Chief Judge Glenn T. Suddaby on 9/5/17. (lmw)
|
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.
