Iglesias v. Vance et al
| Davis Iglesias |
| District Attorney Cyrus Vance and Public Defender Tiffany Wang |
| 1:2021cv02406 |
| March 17, 2021 |
| US District Court for the Southern District of New York |
| Foley Square Office |
| Colleen McMahon |
| Prisoner: Civil Rights |
| 42 U.S.C. ยง 1983 |
| Plaintiff |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on April 20, 2021. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Mailed a copy of #6 Judgment - Sua Sponte (Complaint), #5 Order of Dismissal, to Davis Iglesias, ID: JD 9326 at SCI - Camp Hill, P.O. Box 200, Camp Hill, PA 17001. (Attachments: # 1 PRO SE APPEAL PACKAGE) (dsh) |
Filing 6
CIVIL JUDGMENT: IT IS ORDERED, ADJUDGED AND DECREED that the complaint is dismissed without prejudice under Rule 41(b) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure for failure to comply with the Court's order. The Court certifies under 28 U.S.C. 1915(a)(3) that any appeal from the Court's judgment would not be taken in good faith. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Clerk of Court mail a copy of this judgment to Plaintiff and note service on the docket. SO ORDERED. (Signed by Judge Colleen McMahon on 4/19/21) (Attachments: #1 PRO SE APPEAL PACKAGE) (rdz) Transmission to Docket Assistant Clerk for processing.
|
|
Filing 5
ORDER OF DISMISSAL: Accordingly, the complaint is dismissed without prejudice. See 28 U.S.C. 1914, 1915. The Clerk of Court is directed to mail a copy of this order to Plaintiff and note 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 IFP status is denied for the purpose of an appeal. Cf. Coppedge v. United States, 369 U.S. 438, 444-45 (1962) (holding that an appellant demonstrates good faith when he seeks review of a nonfrivolous issue). SO ORDERED. (Signed by Judge Colleen McMahon on 4/19/21) (rdz) Transmission to Docket Assistant Clerk for processing.
|
| Received returned mail re: #4 Order Directing Prisoner Authorization. Mail was addressed to Davis Iglesias, ID: JD 9326, SCI - Camp Hill, P.O. Box 200, Camp Hill, PA 17001 and was returned for the following reason(s): FAILED AUTHENTICATION. (vn) |
| Mailed a copy of #4 Order Directing Prisoner Authorization to Davis Iglesias, ID: JD 9326 at SCI - Camp Hill, P.O. Box 200, Camp Hill, PA 17001. (kh) |
|
Filing 4
ORDER DIRECTING UPDATED PRISONER AUTHORIZATION: Plaintiff is directed to submit a completed and signed updated Prisoner Authorization Form to this Court's Pro Se Office within thirty (30) days of the date of this Order. The Clerk of Court is directed to assign this matter to my docket. The Court certifies, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 1915(a)(3), that any appeal from this Order would not be taken in good faith, and therefore in forma pauperis status is denied for the purpose of an appeal. See Coppedge v. United States, 369 U.S. 438, 444-45 (1962). Prisoner Authorization Form due by 4/19/2021. (Signed by Judge Colleen McMahon on 3/19/2021) (Attachments: #1 prisoner authorization) (keb) Transmission to Docket Assistant Clerk for processing.
|
| NOTICE OF CASE REASSIGNMENT - SUA SPONTE to Judge Colleen McMahon. Judge Unassigned is no longer assigned to the case..(bcu) |
| Filing 3 PRISONER AUTHORIZATION. Document filed by Davis Iglesias. (sac) |
| Filing 2 COMPLAINT against Cyrus Vance, Tiffany Wang. Document filed by Davis Iglesias. (sac) |
| Filing 1 REQUEST TO PROCEED IN FORMA PAUPERIS. Document filed by Davis Iglesias. (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.
