Void-Brown v. City of New York et al
| Janiese Void-Brown |
| Hedy Augenbraun, City of New York, The Drug Enforcement Agency (DEA), New York City Police Department (NYPD), The Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) and City of New York/ New York City Police Department(NYPD) |
| 1:2019cv08594 |
| September 16, 2019 |
| US District Court for the Southern District of New York |
| Paul A Engelmayer |
| Barbara C Moses |
| Civil Rights: Other |
| 42 U.S.C. ยง 1983 |
| None |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on June 30, 2020. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Received returned mail re: Mailed Order by USPS on 9/20/19. Mail was addressed to Janiese Void-Brown at 116 Williams Ave, Brooklyn, NY 11207 and was returned for the following reason(s): Not Deliverable as Addressed. (va) |
Filing 7
ORDER OF DISMISSAL: On September 20, 2019, the Court dismissed plaintiff's complaint as frivolous and did not grant her leave to amend. See Dkt. 5 ("Order of Dismissal") at 4. The same day, plaintiff filed an amended complaint. Dkt. 6. For the reasons supplied in the September 20, 2019 Order of Dismissal, plaintiff's amended complaint is also dismissed. (Signed by Judge Paul A. Engelmayer on 9/24/2019) (mro)
|
| Filing 6 AMENDED COMPLAINT; re: amending #1 Complaint, against Hedy Augenbraun, City of New York/ New York City Police Department(NYPD), The Drug Enforcement Agency (DEA), The Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI).Document filed by Janiese Void-Brown. Related document: #1 Complaint.(sc) |
|
Filing 5
ORDER OF DISMISSAL: Void-Brown's complaint is dismissed as frivolous. The Clerk of Court is directed to mail a copy of this order to Void-Brown and note the fact of such service on the docket. 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 informa pauperis status is denied for the purpose of an appeal. See Coppedge v. United States, 369 U.S. 438, 444-45 (1962). The Clerk of Court is directed to docket this as a "written opinion" within the meaning of Section 205(a)(5) of the E-GovernmentAct of 2002. Pub. L. 107-347, 205, 116 Stat. 1899, 2913 (2002) (codified at 44 U.S.C. 3501 note). SO ORDERED. (Signed by Judge Paul A. Engelmayer on 9/20/2019) (kv) Transmission to Docket Assistant Clerk for processing.
|
| Mailed a copy of #5 Order of Dismissal, to Janiese Void-Brown 116 Williams Ave Brooklyn, NY 11207. (aea) |
|
Filing 3
ORDER REFERRING CASE TO MAGISTRATE JUDGE. Order that case be referred to the Clerk of Court for assignment to a Magistrate Judge for General Pretrial (includes scheduling, discovery, non-dispositive pretrial motions, and settlement). Referred to Magistrate Judge Barbara C. Moses. (Signed by Judge Paul A. Engelmayer on 9/18/2019) (ne)
|
| Filing 2 CIVIL COVER SHEET filed. (sac) |
| Filing 1 COMPLAINT against Hedy Augenbraun, City of New York, New York City Police Department (NYPD), The Drug Enforcement Agency (DEA), The Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI). (Filing Fee $ 400.00, Receipt Number 465401244016) Document filed by Janiese Void-Brown. (sac) |
| Magistrate Judge Barbara C. Moses is so designated. Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. Section 636(c) and Fed. R. Civ. P. 73(b)(1) parties are notified that they may consent to proceed before a United States Magistrate Judge. Parties who wish to consent may access the necessary form at the following link: #http://nysd.uscourts.gov/forms.php. (sac) |
| Case Designated ECF. (sac) |
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 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.
