Taveras v. New York City Bureau of Correction et al
| Pedro Taveras |
| City of New York, Davis, Andrew, McCovan, Voughn, Glover and DeFilece |
| 1:2009cv03499 |
| April 7, 2009 |
| US District Court for the Southern District of New York |
| Foley Square Office |
| Queens |
| Leonard B. Sand |
| Plaintiff |
| 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
24
MEMORANDUM ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS; that the Court has reviewed the motion to dismiss and the underlying record de novo. Having done so, and finding petitioner's objections to be without merit, the Court finds itself in complet e agreement with Judge Francis' excellent Report and hereby adopts its reasoning by reference. Accordingly, the Court dismisses the petition, with prejudice. In addition, because petitioner has not made a substantial showing of the denial of a c onstitutional right, a certificate of appealability will not issue. See 28 U.S.C. § 2253. Moreover, the Court certifies that any appeal from this Order would not be taken in good faith, as petitioner's claim lacks any arguable basis in law or fact, and therefore permission to proceed in forma pauperis is also denied. See 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a) (3); see also Seimon v. Emigrant Savs. Bank (In re Seimon), 421 F.3d 167, 169 (2d Cir. 2005). Clerk to enter judgment. (Signed by Judge Jed S. Rakoff on 8/3/2010) (ae)
|
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 Southern 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.
