Martin v. Oey et al
| Nicholas Martin |
| R. Oey, D. Venettozzi and A. Annucci |
| 9:2016cv00717 |
| June 20, 2016 |
| US District Court for the Northern District of New York |
| Prisoner Office |
| Washington |
| Therese Wiley Dancks |
| Thomas J. McAvoy |
| 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
62
JUDGMENT entered dismissing the action pursuant to the 2/19/19 Decision and Order of Judge McAvoy.{judgment served via regular and certified mail on plaintiff} (nas, ) (Main Document 62 replaced on 2/19/2019) (nas, ).
|
|
Filing
37
DECISION AND ORDER: The Plaintiff's objections to the Report-Recommendation, dkt. # 36 , are hereby OVERRULED. The Report-Recommendation, dkt. # 35 , is hereby ACCEPTED. According: 1. the Plaintiff's Second Amended Complaint, dkt. # [3 4], is accepted for filing as the operative pleading in this action; 2. Defendant Wyckoff is DIRECTED to respond to Plaintiff's Eighth Amendment excessive force claim; 3. Plaintiff's Fourteenth Amendment due process claim is hereby DISMI SSED WITH PREJUDICE against Defendants Oey, Venettozzi, and Annuuci; 4. Plaintiff's claim based on a false misbehavior report against Defendants Wyckoff, Mitchell, Wentzel, and Oey is hereby DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE; and 5. Plaintiff's Eighth Amendment conditions of confinement and medical indifference claims are hereby DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE. Signed by Senior Judge Thomas J. McAvoy on 12/27/17. (served on plaintiff by regular mail) (alh, )
|
|
Filing
31
DECISION AND ORDER: The Court accepts and adopts Magistrate Judge Dancks' Order and Report-Recommendation (Dkt. No. 28 ) in its entirety. Accordingly, Defendants' motion to dismiss (Dkt. No. 17 ) is GRANTED, and Plaintiff's amended complaint is DISMISSED with leave to file a second amended complaint within thirty (30) days from the date of this Decision and Order. Plaintiff is advised that an amended complaint supersedes in all respects the prior pleading. Therefore, if Pl aintiff files a second amended complaint, he must properly allege in the second amended complaint all factual bases for all claims asserted therein. The failure to file a second amended complaint within this time frame will be deemed as an abandonmen t of all claims in the amended complaint, and a "with prejudice" dismissal will be entered on the Court's docket on the amended complaint without further order by the Court. Plaintiff's motion for an extension of time to file ob jections to Magistrate Judge Dancks' July 19, 2017 Order and Report-Recommendation (Dkt. No. 29 ) is DENIED as moot. Signed by Senior Judge Thomas J. McAvoy on 9/20/17. (Notice of Compliance Deadline 10/20/2017, Case Review Deadline 11/20/2017) (served on plaintiff by regular mail) (alh, )
|
|
Filing
11
DECISION AND ORDER: ORDERED that the amended complaint (Dkt. No. 8 ) is accepted for filing and will supersede and replace the previously filed complaint. ORDERED that the Clerk shall issue summonses and forward them, along with copies of the ame nded complaint, to the United States Marshal for service upon the defendants. The Clerk shall forward a copy of the summons and amended complaint by mail to the Office of the New York State Attorney General, together with a copy of this Decision and Order. Signed by Senior Judge Thomas J. McAvoy on 9/8/16. (served on plaintiff 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.
