Clemmons v. Feltz et al
| Anthony Leon Clemmons |
| John R. Feltz, Andrew Hodes, David Plumb, Gerald Lorraine, Nancy F. Eischen and James Walker |
| 1:2015cv08975 |
| November 16, 2015 |
| US District Court for the Southern District of New York |
| Foley Square Office |
| XX Out of State |
| Unassigned |
| 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
80
MEMO OPINION re: 48 MOTION to Dismiss Notice of Motion. filed by Gerald Lorraine, Transport Workers Union of America, 58 MOTION to Dismiss Complaint. filed by Andrew Hodes, Metro North Railroad, David Plumb, Ja mes Walker. For the foregoing reasons, the Union Defendants motion to dismiss the SAC under Rule 12(b)(6) is GRANTED. The Metro-North Defendants motion to dismiss under Rule 12(b)(1) is DENIED, but their motion to dismiss under Rule 12(b)(6) is GRANTED. Defendant Plumbs motion to dismiss under Rule 12(b)(2) is GRANTED. The Clerk of Court is directed to terminate all pending motions, adjourn all remaining dates, and close this case. 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). (Signed by Judge Katherine Polk Failla on 9/26/2017) (js)
|
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.
