Franza v. Stanford et al
| Dominic M. Franza |
| Tina M. Stanford, Edward M. Sharkey, Otis Cruze, Sally Thompson-Velasquez, Gail Hallerdin and Walter William Smith, Jr. |
| 7:2016cv07635 |
| September 29, 2016 |
| US District Court for the Southern District of New York |
| White Plains Office |
| Dutchess |
| Kenneth M. Karas |
| 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
112
ORDER denying 108 Motion for Reconsideration filed by Dominic M. Franza, 85 MOTION to Dismiss . filed by Walter William Smith, Jr., Sally Velasquez-Thompson, Tina M. Stanford, Otis Cruze, Edward M. Sharkey, Gail Hallerdin. For th e foregoing reasons, the Plaintiffs third Motion for Reconsideration is denied. The Clerk of Court is respectfully directed to terminate the pending Motion and mail a copy of this Order to Plaintiff at the address listed on the docket. (Dkt. No. 108.) SO ORDERED. (Signed by Judge Kenneth M. Karas on 9/7/2021) (tg) Transmission to Docket Assistant Clerk for processing.
|
|
Filing
107
ORDER denying 103 Motion for Reconsideration re 103 MOTION for Reconsideration re; 96 Memorandum & Opinion,. filed by Dominic M. Franza. The Plaintiff's Motion for Reconsideration is denied. The Clerk of Court is respectfully dir ected to mail a copy of this Order to Plaintiff at the address listed on the docket and terminate the pending motion (Dkt. No. 103). SO ORDERED. (Signed by Judge Kenneth M. Karas on 6/28/21) (yv) Transmission to Docket Assistant Clerk for processing.
|
|
Filing
96
OPINION AND ORDER: For the foregoing reasons, Defendants Motion To Dismiss is granted. A complaint should be dismissed without prejudice if the pleading, "'liberally read', suggests that the plaintiff has a claim that []he has inadequ ately or inartfully pleaded and that []he should therefore be given a chance to reframe." Cuoco v. Moritsugu, 222 F.3d 99, 112 (2d Cir. 2000) (citation and alterations omitted) (quoting Gomez v. USAA Fed. Sav. Bank, 171 F.3d 794, 795 (2d Cir. 1999)). If a complaint, however, has substantive problems and "[a] better pleading will not cure [them]," "[s]uch a futile request to replead should be denied." Id. (citing Hunt v. All. N Am. Gov't Income Tr., 159 F.3d 7 23, 728 (2d Cir. 1998)). Even prose plaintiffs are not entitled to file an amended complaint if the complaint "contains substantive problems such that an amended pleading would be futile." Lastra v. Barnes & Noble Bookstore, No. 11-CV-217 3, 2012 WL 12876, at *9 (S.D.N.Y. Jan. 3, 2012), aff'd, 523 F. App'x 32 (2d Cir. 2013). Because the Court finds that further amendment would be futile, Plaintiffs claims are dismissed with prejudice. The Clerk of the Court is respectful ly requested to terminate the pending motion, (Dkt.No. 80), close this case, and mail a copy of this Opinion to Plaintiff. SO ORDERED. (Signed by Judge Kenneth M. Karas on 2/5/2019) (jca) Transmission to Docket Assistant Clerk for processing. Transmission to Orders and Judgments Clerk for processing.
|
|
Filing
71
OPINION AND ORDER re: 44 FIRST MOTION to Dismiss amended complaint filed by Walter William Smith, Jr., Sally Velasquez-Thompson, Tina M. Stanford, Otis Cruze, Edward M. Sharkey, Gail Hallerdin. For the foregoing reasons, Defendants� 39; Motion To Dismiss is granted. However, because this is the first adjudication of Plaintiff's claims on the merits, the dismissal of Plaintiff's Eighth Amendment claim is without prejudice. If Plaintiff wishes to file an Fourth Amended C omplaint, Plaintiff should include within that Fourth Amended Complaint any changes to correct the deficiencies identified in this Opinion that Plaintiff wishes the Court to consider. The amended complaint will replace, not supplement, the original c omplaint. The amended complaint must contain all of the claims and factual allegations Plaintiff wishes the Court to consider. The Court will not consider factual allegations contained in supplemental letters, declarations, affidavits, or memoranda. If Plaintiff fails to abide by the 30-day deadline, this Action may be dismissed with prejudice. The Clerk of the Court is respectfully requested to terminate the pending motion, (Dkt. No. 44), and to mail a copy of this Opinion to Plaintiff. SO ORDERED. (Signed by Judge Kenneth M. Karas on 2/14/2018) (mml)
|
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.
