Corley v. City of New York et al
Plaintiff: Royce Corley
Defendant: City of New York, Edmund Duffy, Department of Correction and George R. Vierno Center
Case Number: 1:2014cv03202
Filed: April 28, 2014
Court: US District Court for the Southern District of New York
Office: Foley Square Office
County: Albany
Presiding Judge: Gregory H. Woods
Nature of Suit: Prison Condition
Cause of Action: 42 U.S.C. ยง 1983
Jury Demanded By: Plaintiff

Available Case Documents

The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:

Date Filed Document Text
September 28, 2017 Opinion or Order Filing 99 MEMORANDUM AND OPINION re: 89 MOTION to Dismiss the Third Amended Complaint. filed by Richtman, Deborah Moultrie, Dora Schriro, Darnley Proverbs, McQuade, Desmond Myers, City of New York, Edmund Duffy, Randy Merrill, Wynn , Scott Thompson, Texeira. For the foregoing reasons, Defendants motion to dismiss is granted in part and denied in part. As set forth above, Mr. Corleys claims for violation of his religious liberty, race-based discrimination, and retaliation bas ed on the destruction of his legal papers and on Ms. Moultrie's comments about Mr. Corley's criminal record survive. All of Plaintiff's other claims are dismissed.Defendants Duffy, Schriro, Wynn, McQuade, Texeira, Thompson, and the Cit y of New York are dismissed, given that all claims against them have been dismissed. The Court does not grant Plaintiff leave to amend his complaint, as he has already had two opportunities to cure deficiencies raised in his previous pleading. See Ru tolo v. City of New York, 514F.3d 184, 191 (2d Cir. 2008) (Leave to amend, though liberally granted, may properly be denied for... repeated failure to cure deficiencies by amendments previously allowed...). The Court certifies under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3) that any appeal from this order would not be taken in good faith, and therefore in forma pauperis status is denied for the purpose of an appeal.See Coppedge v. United States, 369 U.S. 438, 444-45 (1962). The Court requests that counsel for Defendants provide Plaintiff with copies of unpublished cases cited in this decision pursuant to Local Rule of the United States District Courts for the Southern and Eastern Districts of New York 7.2.The Clerk of Court is instructed to terminate the motion pending at docket number 89 and to mail Plaintiff a copy of this order by certified mail. (Signed by Judge Gregory H. Woods on 9/28/2017) (js) Modified on 9/29/2017 (js).
September 30, 2015 Opinion or Order Filing 41 MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER re: 27 MOTION to Dismiss filed by Edmund Duffy, City of New York. For the foregoing reasons, Defendants' motion to dismiss is granted in part and denied in part. As set forth above, the plaintiff's S ection 1983 claims implicating the Due Process Clause, the First Amendment, conditions of confinement, and unreasonable searches, are dismissed, except with respect to claims related to damage to his legal documents. With respect to his state law cla ims, the plaintiff's "racial and religious discrimination," abuse of process, and negligent infliction of emotional distress claims are dismissed. His claims of negligence survive the motion to dismiss. All of the plaintiff's Sect ion 1983 claims are dismissed against the City of New York. The plaintiff is granted leave to file a third amended complaint to cure these defects within forty-five days from the date of this order. The Court certifies under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)( 3) that any appeal from this order would not be taken in good faith, and therefore in forma pauperis status is denied for the purpose of an appeal. See Coppedge v. United States, 369 U.S. 438, 444-45 (1962).The Clerk of Court is instructed to terminate the motion pending at docket number 27. (As further set forth in this Order.) (Signed by Judge Gregory H. Woods on 9/30/2015) (kko)
November 17, 2014 Opinion or Order Filing 32 MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER re: 27 MOTION to Dismiss . filed by Edmund Duffy, City of New York. On November 13, 2014, defendants filed a Notice of a Motion to Dismiss with an accompanying memorandum of law. Plaintiff's opposition to the motion to dismiss is due by December 8, 2014. Defendants' reply, if any, is due by December 15, 2014. (Signed by Judge Gregory H. Woods on 11/17/2014) (kgo)
November 14, 2014 Opinion or Order Filing 28 MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER: On November 13, 2014, defendants filed a Notice of a Motion to Dismiss without an accompanying memorandum of law. Defendants are directed to file an accompanying memorandum of law and any other supporting papers forthwi th. In addition, defendants are reminded to comply with the Court's Individual Rule 2(C) in the future, which requires a party to request a pre-motion conference concerning an anticipated motion to dismiss. (Signed by Judge Gregory H. Woods on 11/14/2014) (kgo)
August 29, 2014 Opinion or Order Filing 19 MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER: Accordingly, Corley's motion for reconsideration is denied. Defendants DOC and GRVC remain dismissed from this case. (Signed by Judge Gregory H. Woods on 8/29/2014) (djc)
Access additional case information on PACER

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 this case: Corley v. City of New York et al
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Plaintiff: Royce Corley
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Finance [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Defendant: City of New York
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Finance [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Defendant: Edmund Duffy
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Finance [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Defendant: Department of Correction
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Finance [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Defendant: George R. Vierno Center
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Finance [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]

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.


Why Is My Information Online?