Mosdos Chofetz Chaim, Inc. v. Village of Wesley Hills et al.
Plaintiff: Mosdos Chofetz Chaim, Inc.
Case Number: 7:2008cv00156
Filed: January 8, 2008
Court: US District Court for the Southern District of New York
Office: White Plains Office
County: Rockland
Presiding Judge: Unassigned
Nature of Suit: Civil Rights: Other
Cause of Action: 42 U.S.C. ยง 1983 Civil Rights Act
Jury Demanded By: Plaintiff

Available Case Documents

The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:

Date Filed Document Text
March 27, 2015 Opinion or Order Filing 142 OPINION AND ORDER re: (106 in 7:08-cv-00156-KMK) MOTION for Summary Judgment filed by The Village of Pomona, (39 in 7:12-cv-08856-KMK) MOTION for Summary Judgment filed by The Village of Wesley Hills, The Village of M ontebello, The Village of Chestnut Ridge, The Village of Pomona, (101 in 7:08-cv-00156-KMK) MOTION for Summary Judgment filed by Jeffrey Oppenheim, Howard L. Cohen, Jay B. Rosenstein, Edward B. McPherson, Robert I. Rhodes, The Vil lage of Montebello, Jerome Kobre, The Village of Chestnut Ridge, Kathryn Ellsworth, David A. Goldsmith, The Village of Wesley Hills, Robert H. Frankel, (108 in 7:08-cv-00156-KMK) MOTION for Summary Judgment filed by Mosdos Chofet z Chaim, Inc., (44 in 7:12-cv-08856-KMK) MOTION for Summary Judgment filed by Mosdos Chofetz Chaim, Inc. For the foregoing reasons, Defendants' Motions for Summary Judgment are granted, and Plaintiffs' Motion for Summary Jud gment is denied. The Clerk of the Court is respectfully requested to terminate the pending Motions, (No. 08-CV-156 Dkt. Nos. 101, 106, 108; No. 12-CV-8856 Dkt. Nos. 39, 44), and to close both cases. SO ORDERED. (Signed by Judge Kenneth M. Karas on 3/27/2015) (mml)
September 26, 2011 Opinion or Order Filing 70 OPINION AND ORDER: For the reasons stated herein, the claims of Plaintiffs Mosdos and YCC are dismissed in their entirety. The claims by the Individual Plaintiffs against the Individual Defendants in their individual capacity also are dismissed, as a re the claims against Sanderson and Marshall in theirofficial capacity, though without prejudice. To the extent Plaintiffs are challenging the Village Defendants' zoning regulations and laws, those claims are dismissed. Plaintiffs' claims a gainst the Pomona Defendants under the New York State Constitution are dismissed without prejudice. The motions to dismiss are denied in all other respects. The Clerk of Court is respectfully directed to terminate the pending motions. (Dkt. Nos. 52 a nd 55.) Motions terminated: 55 CROSS MOTION to Dismiss the Amended Complaint. filed by Herbert I. Marshall, Nicholas L. Sanderson, The Village of Pomona, 52 MOTION to Dismiss Amended Complaint. filed by Jeffrey Oppenheim, Howard L. Cohen, Jay B. Rosenstein, Edward B. McPherson, Robert I. Rhodes, The Village of Montebello, Jerome Kobre, The Village of Chestnut Ridge, Kathryn Ellsworth, David A. Goldsmith, The Village of Wesley Hills, Robert H. Frankel. (Signed by Judge Kenneth M. Karas on 9/26/2011) (rj)
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: Mosdos Chofetz Chaim, Inc. v. Village of Wesley Hills et al.
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Plaintiff: Mosdos Chofetz Chaim, Inc.
Represented By: Joseph J Haspel
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?