McCray v. County of Dutchess et al
| Cerious McCray |
| Cooper, New York State Division of Parole, County of Dutchess, N.A. Caparco, Bureau of Poughkeepsie, Fred Flood, Teresa Burgess, Temistocles E. Disla, Brown and Smith-Wick |
| 7:2010cv03930 |
| May 11, 2010 |
| US District Court for the Southern District of New York |
| White Plains Office |
| Dutchess |
| Cathy Seibel |
| 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
126
ORDER: Plaintiff has filed a motion for various forms of relief. (Doc. 125.) Under Valentin v. Dinkins, 121 F.3d 72 (2d Cir. 1997), a pro se litigant is entitled to assistance from the district court in identifying a John Doe defendant. Id. at 76. Th e Plaintiff believes that Patrolman John Doe, a Wappingers Falls police officer named in the Second Amended Complaint, is named Mazzacone, and the Complaint supplies sufficient information to permit identification of the John Doe Defendant who allege dly committed civil rights violations during a traffic stop in March 2008. It is therefore ORDERED that the Attorney for the Village of Wappingers Falls shall ascertain the identity of this Patrolman John Doe Defendant whom Plaintiff seeks to sue her e and the address where this Defendant may be served. The Attorney for the Village of Wappingers Falls shall provide this information to Plaintiff and the Court within thirty (30) days of the date of this Order. In lieu of requiring Plaintiff to fil e a Third Amended Complaint naming the John Doe Defendant, I will then issue an Order substituting the real name for Patrolman John Doe. Once that Order is entered, the Clerk of Court shall issue a Summons to that Individual and the Pro Se Office sha ll send to Plaintiff a Rule 4 service package. Plaintiff shall then have one hundred and twenty (120) days from the date the Amended Summons is issued to serve the John Doe Defendant with that Summons, the Second Amended Complaint, (Doc. 37), my Nove mber 6, 2012 Order, (Doc. 88), and the Order of Substitution that will have been entered. If service of the above documents has not been made within the 120 days, and Plaintiff has not requested an extension of time to serve within that 120 days, the action may be dismissed for failure to prosecute, pursuant to Rules 4 and 41 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, without further notice. I see no need for the Marshals Service to serve Dutchess County, as it has already answered the Second Amen ded Complaint. Nor do I see any basis for a stay or equitable tolling. Accordingly, those applications are denied. 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 th erefore in forma 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 respectfully directed to terminate the pending motion, (Doc. 125). SO ORDERED. Motions terminated: 125 MOTION to Substitute Party. (Signed by Judge Cathy Seibel on 3/15/2013) The Clerks Office Has Mailed Copies. (lnl)
|
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.
