An v. The City Of New York ,

An v. The City Of New York ,

Plaintiff:	Ruben An
Defendant:	The City Of New York ,
Case Number:	1:2016cv05381
Filed:	July 6, 2016
Court:	US District Court for the Southern District of New York
Office:	Foley Square Office
County:	New York
Presiding Judge:	Lorna G. Schofield
Nature of Suit:	Civil Rights: Other
Cause of Action:	42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Jury Demanded By:	Both

Follow case documents by RSS

Available Case Documents

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

Date Filed	Document Text
June 1, 2017	Filing 41 OPINION AND ORDER re: 33 MOTION for Leave to File Amended Complaint and Demand for Jury Trial, filed by Ruben An. Plaintiff's motion for leave to file a First Amended Complaint in the form of the Proposed Amended Complaint is GRANTED. The Clerk of Court is directed to close the motion at Docket No. 33, and as further set forth herein. (Signed by Judge Lorna G. Schofield on 6/1/2017) (ras) Modified on 6/1/2017 (ras).
February 2, 2017	Filing 31 OPINION AND ORDER re: 23 MOTION to Dismiss . MOTION to Dismiss for Lack of Jurisdiction . filed by The City Of New York,. For the foregoing reasons, the Citys motion to dismiss for lack of subject matter jurisdiction is GR ANTED and the Complaint is DISMISSED without prejudice. Any motion for leave to amend the Complaint must be filed within three (3) weeks of the date of this Order with a copy of the proposed amended pleading. The Clerk of Court is directed to close the motion at Dkt. No. 23. (Signed by Judge Lorna G. Schofield on 2/2/2017) (kgo) Modified on 2/2/2017 (kgo).

Date Filed

Document Text

June 1, 2017

Filing 41 OPINION AND ORDER re: 33 MOTION for Leave to File Amended Complaint and Demand for Jury Trial, filed by Ruben An. Plaintiff's motion for leave to file a First Amended Complaint in the form of the Proposed Amended Complaint is GRANTED. The Clerk of Court is directed to close the motion at Docket No. 33, and as further set forth herein. (Signed by Judge Lorna G. Schofield on 6/1/2017) (ras) Modified on 6/1/2017 (ras).

February 2, 2017

Filing 31 OPINION AND ORDER re: 23 MOTION to Dismiss . MOTION to Dismiss for Lack of Jurisdiction . filed by The City Of New York,. For the foregoing reasons, the Citys motion to dismiss for lack of subject matter jurisdiction is GR ANTED and the Complaint is DISMISSED without prejudice. Any motion for leave to amend the Complaint must be filed within three (3) weeks of the date of this Order with a copy of the proposed amended pleading. The Clerk of Court is directed to close the motion at Dkt. No. 23. (Signed by Judge Lorna G. Schofield on 2/2/2017) (kgo) Modified on 2/2/2017 (kgo).

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: An v. The City Of New York ,
Search News	[ Google News \| Marketwatch \| Wall Street Journal \| Financial Times \| New York Times ]
Search Web	[ Unicourt \| Legal Web \| Google \| Bing \| Yahoo \| Ask ]
Plaintiff: Ruben An
Represented By:	Joshua Slade Carrin
Represented By:	Cynthia Helen Conti-Cook
Represented By:	Charles S. Sims
Represented By:	Sarah Elizabeth Sullivan
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: The City Of New York ,
Represented By:	Mark David Zuckerman
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?