Sutton v. County of Westchester Jail Department of Corrections
| Philip B. Sutton |
| County of Westchester Jail Department of Corrections |
| 1:2018cv01042 |
| February 5, 2018 |
| US District Court for the Southern District of New York |
| Foley Square Office |
| Westchester |
| 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
93
ORDER re: 83 MOTION to Dismiss . filed by Raul Ulloa, Dr. Gendell, Joon Parks, 87 MOTION to Dismiss the Second Amended Complaint. filed by L. Diaz, Officer Rodriguez, Captain Carden, Set Deadlines/Hearing as to 83 MOTION to Dismiss ., 87 MOTION to Dismiss the Second Amended Complaint. The application filed by Defendants Dr. Gendell, Joon Parks, and Raul Ulloa to deem their motion as fully submitted (Doc. 91) is DENIED. The Court sua sponte extends Plaintiff's time to oppose the motions to dismiss to April 9, 2021. Defendants' replies, if any, are due April 23, 2021. If Plaintiff fails to file his opposition by April 9, 2021, the motions will be deemed fully submitte d and unopposed. No further extensions of time will be granted. The Clerk is instructed to mail a copy of this Order to plaintiff at the address on the docket. SO-ORDERED. :( Responses due by 4/9/2021, Replies due by 4/23/2021.) (Signed by Judge Philip M. Halpern on 3/8/21) (yv) Transmission to Docket Assistant Clerk for processing.
|
|
Filing
69
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER re: 54 MOTION to Dismiss . filed by Raul Ulloa, (CCS)Correct Care Solutions, Dr. Gendell, Joon Parks, 59 MOTION to Dismiss . filed by L. Diaz, Officer Rodriguez, Captain Carden. Base d on the foregoing, the Court GRANTS Defendants' motions to dismiss without prejudice. Plaintiff may file a Second Amended Complaint within 30 days from the date of this Order to address the pleading deficiencies identified herein. Failure to file a Second Amended Complaint within 30 days will result in dismissal of this action. Plaintiff is reminded that if he chooses to file a Second Amended Complaint, the Second Amended Complaint will completely replace, not supplement, the origina l complaint. Therefore, any facts or claims that Plaintiff wishes to maintain must be included in the Second Amended Complaint. The Clerk is instructed to terminate the pending motions (Docs. 54, 59). Defendants are directed to mail a copy of this Order to Plaintiff and file proof of service on the docket. SO ORDERED. (Signed by Judge Philip M. Halpern on 9/8/2020) (ks) Transmission to Orders and Judgments Clerk for processing.
|
|
Filing
68
ORDER DENYING REQUEST FOR PRO BONO COUNSEL denying 67 Motion to Appoint Counsel. The Court is in receipt of pro se Plaintiff's third request for the appointment of pro bono counsel. (Docs. 66, 67). For the following reasons, Plaintiff& #039;s application is denied. As further set forth in this Order. For the foregoing reasons, Plaintiff's Application for the Court to Request Counsel is denied. Denial of Plaintiff's request is without prejudice to Plaintiff's renewed application later in the 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 IFP status is denied for the purpose of an appeal. See Coppedge v. Unit ed States, 369 U.S. 438, 444-45 (1962). Counsel for Defendants is instructed to deliver a copy of this Order to Plaintiff. The Clerk is instructed to terminate the motion. (Doc. 67). SO ORDERED.. (Signed by Judge Philip M. Halpern on 5/22/2020) (ks)
|
|
Filing
65
ORDER: The Court is in receipt of prose Plaintiff's second request, filed December 30, 2019, for the appointment of pro bona counsel. (ECF No. 52.) However, this action is still in its early stages. Defendants have not yet filed answers t o the Complaint. Moreover, Defendants recently filed motions to dismiss in January 2020. (See ECF Nos. 54 & 59.) At this early stage in the proceedings, there is no indication that Plaintiffs position seems likely to be of substance or that there are particularly complex issues requiring the appointment of pro bono counsel. The Court is also unable to determine that Plaintiff is unable to handle this case without assistance, although this conclusion may change as the action continues. There fore, because the Court does not find any circumstances which warrant the appointment of pro bono counsel at this time, Plaintiffs application must be DENIED without prejudice to renew it at a later stage in the proceedings. The Clerk of Court is respectfully directed to mail a copy of this Order to Plaintiff at his address as listed on ECF and to show proof of service on the docket. (And as further set forth herein.) SO ORDERED. (Signed by Judge Nelson Stephen Roman on 3/10/2020) (jca) Transmission to Docket Assistant 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
| Search for this case: Sutton v. County of Westchester Jail Department of Corrections | |
|---|---|
| Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
| Search Web | [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ] |
| Plaintiff: Philip B. Sutton | |
| 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: County of Westchester Jail Department of Corrections | |
| 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.
