Nguedi v. The City of New York et al
Gerard Nguedi |
The City of New York, Bill Bratton, Brian Caulfield, John Doe #1, John Doe #2, John Doe #3, John Doe#4, John Doe #5, John Doe #6, John Doe #7, John Doe #8 and John Doe #9 |
1:2016cv04430 |
June 13, 2016 |
US District Court for the Southern District of New York |
Foley Square Office |
New York |
Unassigned |
Other Civil Rights |
42 U.S.C. ยง 1983 |
Plaintiff |
Available Case Documents
The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:
Document Text |
---|
Filing 68 OPINION & ORDER re: 47 MOTION for Summary Judgment filed by The City of New York, Bill Bratton, 53 MOTION for Summary Judgment filed by Brian Caulfield, 52 MOTION for Summary Judgment filed by Brian Caulfield. For the foregoing reasons, Defendants' motions for summary judgment are granted. The Court has been mindful of Plaintiffs pro se status, but nonetheless finds that no genuine dispute of material fact exists. Because the individual police officers were never served with the Amended Complaint, the claims against them are dismissed without prejudice. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 4(m). The Clerk of Court is respectfully directed to enter judgment in favor of defendants; terminate the mo tions pending at docket entries forty- seven, fifty-two, and fifty-three; close the case; and mail a copy of this Order to Plaintiff. SO ORDERED. (Signed by Judge Ronnie Abrams on 9/27/2018) (anc) Transmission to Docket Assistant Clerk for processing. Transmission to Orders and Judgments Clerk for processing. |
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.