Doe v. Kaplan et al
| Jane Doe |
| Sabina Kaplan, Roy Snyder, Ruben Garcia, Maldonado, Carmen Padilla and John/Jane Does 1-10 |
| 7:2016cv09870 |
| December 22, 2016 |
| US District Court for the Southern District of New York |
| White Plains Office |
| Westchester |
| Nelson Stephen Roman |
| 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
33
OPINION AND ORDER re: 28 MOTION to Dismiss . filed by Roy Snyder, Sabina Kaplan, Carmen Padilla. The Supervisory Defendants' motion to dismiss Plaintiff's Complaint is hereby DENIED in part and GRANTED in part. The motion is granted to the extent the Supervisory Defendants have moved to dismiss Plaintiff's state law claims against them arising from conduct that occurred within the scope of their employment; such claims are hereby dismissed with prejudice. Th e motion is denied on all other grounds. The Supervisory Defendants are directed to file an answer on or before April 24, 2018. All parties are directed to appear for an Initial Pre-trial Conference on April 27, 2018 at 12: 10 p.m. and prepare and provide a case management plan to chambers in advance thereof. The Clerk of Court is respectfully directed to terminate the motion at ECF No. 28. So Ordered., (Initial Conference set for 4/27/2018 at 12:10 PM before Judge Nelson Stephen Roman.) (Signed by Judge Nelson Stephen Roman on 3/22/18) (yv)
|
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.
