Laporte v. Correction Sergeant Fisher et al
| Hector Laporte |
| Correction Sergeant Fisher and Correction Officer Banks |
| 1:2011cv09458 |
| December 21, 2011 |
| US District Court for the Southern District of New York |
| Foley Square Office |
| Westchester |
| P. Kevin Castel |
| Henry B. Pitman |
| 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
79
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER granting 50 Motion to Appoint Counsel; granting in part and denying in part 58 Motion for Summary Judgment: For the foregoing reasons, Banks and Fisher's motion for summary judgment (Docket # 58) is GRANTED with respect to the claims against Banks and DENIED with respect to the claims against Fisher. Laporte's motion to appoint counsel (Docket # 50) is GRANTED to the extent that the Court's Pro Se Office is respectfully requested to place th e case on the eligible list for volunteer lawyers willing to undertake a case without a fee. Counsel for defendants is directed to supply plaintiff with copies of all unreported decisions cited herein. The Court certifies pursuant to 28 U.S.C. &# 167; 1915(a)(3) that any appeal from this order would not be taken in good faith and therefore in forma pauperis status is denied. See Coppedge v. United States, 369 U.S. 438, 444-445 (1962). (Signed by Judge P. Kevin Castel on 6/26/2014) (tn)
|
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.
