Walker v. Ponte et al
| Michael Walker |
| Joseph Ponte, Lisa Cooper and City of New York |
| 1:2014cv08507 |
| October 20, 2014 |
| US District Court for the Southern District of New York |
| Foley Square Office |
| New York |
| Edgardo Ramos |
| Prison Condition |
| 42 U.S.C. ยง 1983 |
| None |
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
72
OPINION AND ORDER re: 60 MOTION for Summary Judgment . filed by Joseph Ponte, Otis Bantum Correction Center, Lisa Cooper, City of New York: Michael Walker ("Plaintiff" or "Walker"), appearing pro se, brings t his action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983, alleging that his constitutional rights were violated as a pretrial detainee in the Otis Bantum Correctional Center ("OBCC") and the Brooklyn Detention Complex ("BKDC"). Plaintiff all eges that Commissioner Joseph Ponte ("Commissioner Ponte"), Warden Lisa Cooper ("Warden Cooper"), OBCC, and the City of New York (the "City," and collectively, "Defendants") violated his constitutional rights b y subjecting him to strip searches and by forcing him to pass through a radiation-emitting x-ray screening machine called the RadPro SecurPass ("SecurPass"). Plaintiff seeks compensatory damages, punitive damages, injunctive relief, and a d eclaratory judgment that Defendants' acts and omissions violated his constitutional rights. Defendants now move to dismiss pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 56 on the grounds that Walker cannot establish a § 1983 claim under the E ighth or Fourteenth Amendments as a matter of law. Doc. 60. For the reasons set forth above, Defendant,s motion for summary judgment is GRANTED. Walker's remaining claim arising under § 1983 and his Amended Complaint, Doc. 29, is therefore dismissed. The Clerk of the Court is respectfully directed to terminate the motion, Doc. 60, close the case, and mail a copy of this order to Plaintiff. The Court certifies under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3) that any appeal from this order would not b e taken in good faith, and therefore in forma pauperis status is denied for the purpose of an appeal. Cf Coppedge v. United States, 369 U.S. 438, 444--45 (1962) (holding that appellant demonstrates good faith when seeking review of a nonfrivolous issue). (Signed by Judge Edgardo Ramos on 6/21/2017) (jwh) Modified on 6/22/2017 (jwh).
|
|
Filing
47
OPINION AND ORDER re: 37 MOTION to Dismiss filed by Joseph Ponte, Lisa Cooper, City of New York. For the reasons set forth above, Defendants' motion to dismiss is GRANTED in part and DENIED in part. The Court: GRANTS Defendants 9; motion to dismiss Plaintiff's Fourth Amendment claim of illegal search and seizure resulting from the strip searches; GRANTS Defendants' motion to dismiss Plaintiff's Fourteenth Amendment claim of cruel and unusual punishment resul ting from the strip searches; and DENIES Defendants' motion to dismiss Plaintiff's Fourteenth Amendment claim of cruel and unusual punishment resulting from the use of the RadPro x-ray scanning machine. The Clerk of the Court is respectfu lly directed to terminate the motion, Doc. 37, and to dismiss Bantum from this action. The parties are directed to appear for a status conference on August 31, 2016 at 10:00 AM. It is SO ORDERED. (As further set forth in this Order.) Otis Bantum Correction Center terminated. (Status Conference set for 8/31/2016 at 10:00 AM before Judge Edgardo Ramos.) (Signed by Judge Edgardo Ramos on 8/18/2016) (kko)
|
|
Filing
31
ORDER. On August 24, 2015, this Court directed Plaintiff to file an amended complaint and a new application to proceed in forma pauperis ("IFP Application"). Doc. 27. Plaintiff filed an amended complaint on October 21, 2015, but failed to i nclude an IFP Application. Doc. 29. The Court directed Plaintiff by Order dated November 10, 2015, to either pay the civil action filing fee or submit a completed IFP Application within 30 days - by December 10, 2015. Doc. 30. Accordingly, Defendants ' time to answer or otherwise respond to the amended complaint is extended to ten days after Plaintiff complies with the Order to either pay the filing fee or submit a completed IFP Application. It is SO ORDERED. (Signed by Judge Edgardo Ramos on 11/19/2015) (rjm)
|
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.
