Campbell v. Truw et al
| Demond Campbell |
| Correctional Officer Truw and Correctional Officer Murphy |
| 1:2018cv05507 |
| June 19, 2018 |
| US District Court for the Southern District of New York |
| White Plains Office |
| XX Out of State |
| Nelson Stephen Roman |
| 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
142
ORDER denying 141 Letter Motion to Adjourn Conference. Defts' request is denied as the next telephonic Pretrial Conf. is scheduled for Sept. 6, 2023 at 11:00 am. To access the teleconference, please follow these directions: (1) Dial the M eeting Number: (877) 336-1839; (2) Enter the Access Code: 1231334 #; (3) Press pound (#) to enter the teleconference as a guest. The parties are reminded that a jury trial is scheduled to begin on Oct. 17, 2023. Defts are directed to mail a copy of this endorsement to pro se Pltf. and file proof of service. Clerk of Court is requested to terminate the motion at ECF No. 141. (Signed by Judge Nelson Stephen Roman on 7/13/2023) (ate)
|
|
Filing
135
RESCHEDULING ORDER: Therefore, it is hereby ORDERED that the above case scheduled for a Pretrial Conference on May 4, 2023 is advanced to May 3, 2023 at 10:00 am to be held via teleconference. To access the teleconference, please follow these di rections: (1) Dial the Meeting Number: (877) 336-1839; (2) Enter the Access Code: 1231334 #; (3) Press pound (#) to enter the teleconference as a guest. ( Telephone Conference set for 5/3/2023 at 10:00 AM before Judge Nelson Stephen Roman.) (Signed by Judge Nelson Stephen Roman on 4/18/2023) (ate) Modified on 4/19/2023 (ate).
|
|
Filing
133
ORDER granting 131 Letter Motion to Adjourn Conference. In light of the adjournment of trial and Pltf's request for pro bono counsel, Defts' request to adjourn the Pretrial Teleconf. from Jan. 17, 2023 until Apr. 4, 2023 at 10:00 am is GRANTED. The parties are directed to the Minute Entry dated Oct. 31, 2022 for dial-in instructions. Clerk of Court is requested to terminate the motion at ECF. 131, to mail a copy of this endorsement to pro se Pltf at the address on the docket and to show service. SO ORDERED. Telephone Conference set for 4/4/2023 at 10:00 AM before Judge Nelson Stephen Roman. (Signed by Judge Nelson Stephen Roman on 1/11/2023) (va)
|
|
Filing
129
OPINION AND ORDER re: 126 MOTION for Holwell Shuster & Goldberg LLP to Withdraw as Attorney (Unopposed). filed by Demond Campbell. IT IS ORDERED that Holwell Shushter & Goldberg LLP's motion to withdraw as attorneys for Plai ntiff, being unopposed, is GRANTED. (ECF No. 126.) Mr. Danner is hereby directed to serve a copy of this Order on Plaintiff and file proof of service with the Court thereafter. The Clerk of the Court is kindly directed to terminate the motion at ECF No. 126. The Pro Se Office is ORDERED to request an attorney to represent Plaintiff. 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(1); see Palacio v. City of New York, 489 F. Supp. 2d 335, 344 (S.D.N.Y. 2007). IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the trial scheduled to begin on January 23, 2023, is adjourned to October 17, 2023. SO ORDERED. Attorney Scott Manning Danner and Victoria Roeck terminated. (Signed by Judge Nelson Stephen Roman on 12/16/2022) (kv) Transmission to Office of Pro Se Litigation for processing.
|
|
Filing
83
ORDER GRANTING REQUEST FOR PRO BONO TRIAL COUNSEL: Accordingly, the Court GRANTS Plaintiff's request that the Court issue an order granting his request for pro bono trial counsel. The Court advises Plaintiff that there are no funds to retain counsel in civil cases and the Court relies on volunteers. Due to a scarcity of volunteer attorneys, a lengthy period of time may pass before counsel volunteers to represent Plaintiff. Nevertheless, this litigation will progress at a normal pace . If an attorney volunteers, the attorney will contact Plaintiff directly. There is no guarantee, however, that a volunteer attorney will decide to take the case, and Plaintiff should be prepared to proceed with the case pro se. Of course, if an at torney offers to take the case, it is entirely Plaintiff's decision whether to retain that attorney or not. The Court has established a Pro Bono Fund to encourage greater attorney representation of pro se litigants. The Fund is especially int ended for attorneys for whom pro bono service is a financial hardship. See http://www.nysd.circ2.dcn/docs/prose/pro_bono_fund_order.pdf.] The Court reminds the parties that they are to appear telephonically at the next scheduled status conference on November 23, 2021 at 2:00 PM. The Clerk of Court is directed to mail a copy of this Order to Plaintiff at the address listed on ECF and to show service on the docket. (Signed by Judge Nelson Stephen Roman on 9/23/2021) (ate) Transmission to Docket Assistant Clerk for processing.
|
|
Filing
74
ORDER: The Court is in receipt of documents submitted in this matter in camera. Plaintiff sought production of Defendants' personnel files. None of the documents reviewed by the Court from the Defendants' personnel files have any relevance to the allegations in Plaintiffs complaint. Accordingly, the Court concludes that none of these documents are required to be produced to Plaintiff. The Court will retain the records that were provided for in camera review. The Clerk of the Court is directed to mail a copy of this order to the pro se Plaintiff. (Signed by Magistrate Judge Andrew E. Krause on 11/23/2020) (jwh) 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.
