Dejesus v. John/Jane Doe 1 -10
Plaintiff: LUIS DEJESUS
Defendant: John/Jane Doe 1 -10
Case Number: 1:2022cv08456
Filed: October 4, 2022
Court: US District Court for the Southern District of New York
Presiding Judge: Katherine Polk Failla
Nature of Suit: Civil Rights: Other
Cause of Action: 42 U.S.C. ยง 1983 Civil Rights Act
Jury Demanded By: Plaintiff
Docket Report

This docket was last retrieved on January 4, 2024. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.

Date Filed Document Text
October 5, 2022 Magistrate Judge Gabriel W. Gorenstein 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: #https://nysd.uscourts.gov/sites/default/files/2018-06/AO-3.pdf. (vf)
October 5, 2022 Case Designated ECF. (vf)
October 5, 2022 NOTICE OF PARTICIPATION IN LOCAL CIVIL RULE 83.10 (FORMERLY THE SECTION 1983 PLAN) : Unless otherwise ordered, this case shall participate in the Southern District of New York's Local Civil Rule 83.10. Please reference the Court's website, www.nysd.uscourts.gov, to review Local Civil Rule 83.10, updated 4/1/2015, for important information.(jpt)
October 5, 2022 CASE OPENING INITIAL ASSIGNMENT NOTICE: The above-entitled action is assigned to Judge Katherine Polk Failla. Please download and review the Individual Practices of the assigned District Judge, located at #https://nysd.uscourts.gov/judges/district-judges. Attorneys are responsible for providing courtesy copies to judges where their Individual Practices require such. Please download and review the ECF Rules and Instructions, located at #https://nysd.uscourts.gov/rules/ecf-related-instructions..(vf)
October 5, 2022 ***NOTICE TO ATTORNEY REGARDING CIVIL. CASE OPENING STATISTICAL ERROR CORRECTION: Notice to attorney Evan Craig Brustein. The following case opening statistical information was erroneously selected/entered: Arbitration code e (Exempt); County code New York. The following correction(s) have been made to your case entry: the Arbitration code has been deleted; the County code has been modified to Bronx. (vf)
October 5, 2022 ***NOTICE TO ATTORNEY REGARDING PARTY MODIFICATION. Notice to attorney Evan Craig Brustein. The party information for the following party/parties has been modified: John/Jane Doe 1 -10, LUIS DEJESUS. The information for the party/parties has been modified for the following reason/reasons: party name was entered in all caps; party text was omitted. (vf)
October 4, 2022 Filing 2 CIVIL COVER SHEET filed..(Brustein, Evan)
October 4, 2022 Filing 1 COMPLAINT against John/Jane Doe 1 -10. (Filing Fee $ 402.00, Receipt Number ANYSDC-26772707)Document filed by LUIS DEJESUS..(Brustein, Evan)

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 this case: Dejesus v. John/Jane Doe 1 -10
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Plaintiff: LUIS DEJESUS
Represented By: Evan Craig Brustein
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: John/Jane Doe 1 -10
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.


Why Is My Information Online?