Stoeckley et al v. The City of New York et al
| Clark Stoeckley and Jason Nicholas |
| The City of New York, Velazquez, John Does and Jane Does |
| 1:2009cv07600 |
| September 1, 2009 |
| US District Court for the Southern District of New York |
| Foley Square Office |
| Kings |
| Lewis A. Kaplan |
| Plaintiff |
| 28 U.S.C. ยง 1331 Federal Question: Other Civil Rights |
| 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
40
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER (Corrected) For the foregoing reasons, plaintiffs' motion for leave to file a second amended complaint [DI 28] is denied in all respects. This ruling is without prejudice to plaintiffs' filing a state court complaint al leging exclusively the state law claims proposed to be asserted in the proposed second amended complaint. As this ruling is dispositive of the Section 1983 claims against defendant Velazquez, the Section 1983 and state law tort claims against him are dismissed for failure to state a claim upon which relief may be granted and for lack of subject matter jurisdiction, respectively. The Clerk shall enter final judgment dismissing the action.SO ORDERED. (Signed by Judge Lewis A. Kaplan on 8/8/2010) (jmi)
|
|
Filing
27
MEMORANDUM OPINION: The motion of defendant the City of New York for judgment on the pleadings dismissing the complaint as to the City [DI 14] is granted. (Signed by Judge Lewis A. Kaplan on 3/31/2010) (jpo)
|
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.
