Starker v. Adamovych et al
| Oscar Starker |
| Nataliya Adamovych, City of New York, Christopher Kolenda, Louis Lodato and Does 1 through 20 |
| 1:2015cv03691 |
| April 30, 2015 |
| US District Court for the Southern District of New York |
| Foley Square Office |
| New York |
| Alison J. Nathan |
| Other 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
138
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER. For the above reasons, Plaintiff's motion for reconsideration is DENIED, and Plaintiff's motion for leave to amend the complaint is DENIED. This Order resolves Dkt. Nos. 122 and 123. SO ORDERED. re: 122 MOTION to Vacate 121 Clerk's Judgment filed by Oscar Starker. 123 MOTION for Reconsideration re: 121 Clerk's Judgment filed by Oscar Starker. (Signed by Judge Alison J. Nathan on 10/1/2020) (rjm)
|
|
Filing
127
ORDER granting 126 Letter Motion for Extension of Time to File. SO ORDERED. (Signed by Judge Alison J. Nathan on 12/18/2019) (kv)
|
|
Filing
118
OPINION AND ORDER re: 100 MOTION to Dismiss; 96 MOTION to Dismiss: For the foregoing reasons, Defendants' motions to dismiss are granted. Plaintiff's Amended Complaint is dismissed without prejudice. This resolves Dkt. Nos. 96 and 100. If he wishes to file a second amended complaint, he must do so within 30 days of the date of this Opinion and Order. Failure to do so will result in dismissal of his claims with prejudice. 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. Cf Coppedge v. United States, 369 U.S. 438, 444-45 (1962) (holding that an appellant demonstrates good faith when he seeks review of a nonfrivolous issue). The Court will mail a copy of this Opinion and Order to Plaintiff, and that mailing will be noted on the public docket. (Signed by Judge Alison J. Nathan on 9/30/2019) (jwh)
|
|
Filing
51
ORDER: The Court thus stays this matter pending the state court's resolution of the pending motions for default judgment and to dismiss for lack of service of process. In light of that stay, the Court denies both of the pending motions to dismis s without prejudice. See Dkt. Nos. 39, 41. The parties are ordered to write to the Court one week or sooner after the state court resolves the last of the noted motions. At that time, both sets of defendants may renew their respective motions to dism iss, taking into consideration the effect, if any, of the state court's resolution of the two motions pending in state court. Further, the parties will provide a status update no later than six months from the date of this Order describing any a nd all progress in the parallel state action. This resolves docket numbers 39 and 41. Motions terminated: 39 MOTION to Dismiss the Amended Complaint. filed by Nataliya Adamovych, 41 MOTION to Dismiss . filed by Louis Lodato, City of New York. (Signed by Judge Alison J. Nathan on 2/02/2017) (ama)
|
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.
