Robinson v. Lynn et al
| James Robinson |
| Janice Lynn Wolf Freidman, Kyoung Kim, Ahkand, K. Ott, Robert Bentivegna, Carl Koenisgsmann and Frederick N. Bernstein |
| 1:2018cv02409 |
| March 16, 2018 |
| US District Court for the Southern District of New York |
| White Plains Office |
| Queens |
| Kenneth M. Karas |
| 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
97
CLERK'S JUDGMENT re: 96 Memorandum & Opinion. in favor of Ahkand, Carl Koenisgsmann, Frederick N. Bernstein, Janice Lynn Wolf Freidman, Kevin Oh Or Kenneth, Kyoung Kim, Robert Bentivegna against James Robinson. It is hereby ORDERED, ADJUD GED AND DECREED: That for the reasons stated in the Court's Memorandum Opinion and Order dated February 5, 2021, the Court GRANTS Defendants' motion to dismiss. While "[d]istrict courts should frequently provide leave to amend before dismissing a pro se complaint... leave to amend is not necessary when it would be futile." Reed v. Friedman Mgt. Corp., 541 F. App'x 40, 41 (2d Cir. 2013) (citing Cuoco v. Moritsugu, 222 F.3d 99, 112 (2d Cir. 2000)). Here, the Court dismiss es Plaintiffs Complaint with prejudice as any amendment would be futile and Plaintiff has already had an opportunity to amend his pleading; accordingly, this case is closed. (Signed by Clerk of Court Ruby Krajick on 2/8/2021) (Attachments: # 1 Notice of Right to Appeal) (dt) Transmission to Docket Assistant Clerk for processing.
|
|
Filing
96
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER re: 93 MOTION to Dismiss Amended Complaint. filed by Janice Lynn Wolf Freidman, Carl Koenisgsmann, Robert Bentivegna, Kyoung Kim, Ahkand, K. Ott, Frederick N. Bernstein. For the foregoing reasons, t he Court GRANTS Defendants motion to dismiss. While "[d]istrict courts should frequently provide leave to amend before dismissing a pro se complaint... leave to amend is not necessary when it would be futile." Reed v. Friedman Mgt. Corp., 541 F. Appx 40, 41 (2d Cir. 2013) (citing Cuoco v. Moritsugu, 222 F.3d 99, 112 (2d Cir. 2000)). Here, the Court dismisses Plaintiff's Complaint with prejudice as any amendment would be futile and Plaintiff has already had an opportunity to am end his pleadings. The Court directs the Clerk to terminate the pending motion (Doc. 93) and terminate this action. The Court further directs the Clerk to mail a copy of this Memorandum Opinion and Order to Plaintiff at the address provided on the docket. (As further set forth in this Order.) (Signed by Judge Philip M. Halpern on 2/5/2021) (cf) Transmission to Docket Assistant Clerk for processing. Transmission to Orders and Judgments Clerk for processing.
|
|
Filing
95
OPINION AND ORDER: On May 15, 2020, Defendants filed their motion to dismiss Plaintiff's Amended Complaint. (Doc. 93). Plaintiff's opposition brief was due June 17, 2020. (See Doc. 92). To date, Plaintiff has not filed an opposition to Defendants' motion or sought an extension of time to oppose. The Court sua sponte extends plaintiff's time to oppose Defendants' motion to dismiss to August 28, 2020. Defendants' reply, if any, is due September 11, 2020. If plaintiff fails to file his opposition by August 28, 2020, the motion will be deemed fully submitted and unopposed. No further extensions of time will be granted. Defendants are instructed to mail a copy of this Order to Plaintiff and provide proof of service on the docket by July 30, 2020. SO ORDERED. (Signed by Judge Philip M. Halpern on 7/28/2020) ( Responses due by 8/28/2020, Replies due by 9/11/2020.) (ks)
|
|
Filing
82
OPINION AND ORDER: For the reasons stated above, Defendants' Motion To Dismiss is granted. Because this is the first adjudication of Plaintiff's claims, the dismissal is without prejudice. For the Elmira claims, Plaintiff may reinstitute suit once he can show that he has administratively exhausted all remedies. As to the Green Haven clams, if Plaintiff wishes to file an amended complaint, Plaintiff must do so within 30 days of the date of this Opinion. Plaintiff should include wi thin that amended complaint all changes to correct the deficiencies identified in this Opinion that Plaintiff wishes the Court to consider. Plaintiff is advised that the amended complaint will replace, not supplement, the instant Complaint. The am ended complaint must contain all of the claims, factual allegations, and exhibits that Plaintiff wishes the Court to consider. If Plaintiff fails to abide by the 30-day deadline, his claims may be dismissed with prejudice. The Clerk is respectfully directed to terminate the pending Motion, (Dkt. No. 57), and mail a copy of this Opinion to Plaintiff. SO ORDERED. (Signed by Judge Kenneth M. Karas on 9/24/2019) (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
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.
