Randolph v. DOCCS et al
| Edward Randolph |
| DOCCS, Hasan Dutton, Steven Carpenter, Murdock, Michael Capra, John Doe and Deputy Superintendent of Security |
| 1:2017cv00700 |
| January 30, 2017 |
| US District Court for the Southern District of New York |
| Foley Square Office |
| XX Out of State |
| Unassigned |
| 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
119
ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION for 113 Motion to Dismiss filed by Hasan Dutton, Murdock, Steven Carpenter, 118 Report and Recommendations. For the foregoing reasons, the Court ADOPTS Judge Krause's R & R in its entir ety. Accordingly, the Court GRANTS the Defendants' motion to dismiss for failure to prosecute, and dismisses this action with prejudice. The Court directs the Clerk of Court to terminate the motion at ECF No. 113, terminate the case, and mail a copy of this Order to pro se Plaintiff at his last known address on the docket and show proof of service. (Signed by Judge Nelson Stephen Roman on 2/1/2023) (ate)
|
|
Filing
115
ADJOURNMENT ORDER: The above case previously scheduled for a Status teleconference on December 1, 2022 before the United States District Judge Nelson S. Roman, is hereby adjourned sine die pending resolution of the defendants' motion before Judge Krause. Clerk of Court is requested to mail a copy of this Order to pro se Plaintiff at the address on ECF and show service on the docket. SO ORDERED. (Signed by Judge Nelson Stephen Roman on 10/31/2022) (ama)
|
|
Filing
111
ORDER granting 109 Letter Motion to Adjourn Conference. In light of ongoing discovery issues, Defts' request to adjourn the telephonic Status Conf. from Sept. 9, 2022 until Dec. 1, 2022 at 12:00 noon is GRANTED. The parties are directed to this Court's Order (ECF No. 103) for dial-in instructions. Clerk of Court is requested to mail a copy of this endorsement to pro se Pltf., show service on the docket and terminate the motion at ECF No. 109. Telephone Conference set for 12/1/2022 at 12:00 PM before Judge Nelson Stephen Roman. (Signed by Judge Nelson Stephen Roman on 9/13/2022) (ate)
|
|
Filing
87
ORDER: In order to facilitate the progress of pre-trial discovery of this litigation in a just, speedy and inexpensive manner, to ensure compliance with the case management plan, and to prevent the accumulation of unresolved discovery issues, th e following procedures will be followed for the resolution of discovery disputes: The party objecting to disclosure, claiming an insufficient response to a discovery request, or asserting a privilege bears the burden of coming forward by bringing t he dispute to the attention of the Court as hereinafter set forth. In calculating when a dispute arises, the Court anticipates that the parties have complied with the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and the Local Civil Rules of the United States D istrict Courts for the Southern and Eastern Districts of New York, in that the discovery demand or disclosure at issue and the adversary's response have been served. When a party determines it needs either to compel or preclude discovery, the party must, within 3 business days, confer in good faith with the adverse party or parties in person or bytelephone to attempt to resolve the dispute. If the dispute is not resolved within 3 business days, the objecting party then has 3 business day s to bring the issue to the attention of the Court by filing a letter motion requesting a conference, in accordance with Local Civil Rule 37.2. The letter motion must not exceed 2 double-spaced pages. Any adverse party has 3 business days there after to submit a response, which also must not exceed 2 double-spaced pages. Counsel may annex to the letter submissions the relevant portions of the discovery demands or responses at issue, and/or relevant portions of documents in dispute. Wri tten replies will not be accepted. If the Court deems it necessary, the parties will have an opportunity to make oral replies to points made in the letters at the conference regarding the dispute. When a legal privilege is asserted as a basis for r efusing to comply with a discove1y demand, the parties must follow the same timetable set forth above for attempting to resolve the dispute and raising the issue with the Court. In addition, the party asserting the privilege must, at the same tim e it files its letter motion, file a privilege log that complies with all requirements of Local Civil Rule 26.2 and file an in camera submission of legible copies of any material as to which the assertion of the privilege is in dispute. If privil ege is asserted only over ce1iain parts of a document, the in camera submission must clearly identify the portion(s) of the document for which the privilege is being claimed. If disclosure of the privilege log would reveal privileged informatio n, the party asserting the privilege may file the privilege log under seal via ECF, and serve a redacted log on the adverse party. A party seeking to withhold responsive materials on the basis of a privilege must assert such privilege in writing no later than 30 days from the date when the documents are demanded, unless otherwise directed by the Court. If, in its ongoing obligation to supplement disclosure, a party discovers additional documents that it intends to withhold based upon a pri vilege, such privilege must be asse1ied by counsel no later than 5 business days after receipt of the documents from the client. Any failure to comply with the terms of this Order by not filing objections to discovery, or assertions of privilege, in accordance with the time constraints, and in the form required by this Order, may result in waiver of legal rights and privileges. The time limitations set forth herein and in any other scheduling orders of the Court are to be strictly observe d, and the parties and counsel are not authorized to extend any of the set time limitations without the prior approval of the Court. On matters assigned for pre-trial supervision, any party wishing to file objections to a discovery ruling entered orally on the record must, on the date of the ruling, order a transcript of the proceeding in which the ruling was issued. The transcript must be ordered on a 2-day expedited basis. The objecting party then shall have 14 days from the date of the r eceipt of the transcript to file any objections with the assigned District Judge. A failure to order the record in accordance with these directions may result in a failure to timely file objections. The attention of counsel and the parties is resp ectfully directed to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 30(d) regarding the conduct of depositions. If a privilege objection is raised at a deposition, counsel are directed to contact chambers by telephone during the deposition at 9l4- 390-4070 for a ruling. The Clerk of the Court is respectfully directed to send a copy of this order to the pro se Plaintiff. (Signed by Magistrate Judge Andrew E. Krause on 10/7/2021) (tg) Transmission to Docket Assistant Clerk for processing.
|
|
Filing
77
MEMO ENDORSED ORDER denying without prejudice 76 Application for the Court to Request Counsel. ENDORSEMENT: The Court has received prose Plaintiff's application for pro bono counsel. (ECF No. 76 and attached.) The Court has directed the pa rties to jointly submit at Case Management Plan and Scheduling Order ("CMP") on or before May 10, 2021 or, if the parties are unable to confer regarding the CMP due to Plaintiff residing at the Central New York Psychiatric Center, then De fendants and Plaintiff may separately file proposed CMPs on their own behalf on or before May 10, 2021. Once the Court has reviewed the CMP(s) filed by the parties, it will refer this matter to Magistrate Judge Andrew Krause for general pretrial p urposes. (ECF No. 75 and attached). Plaintiff is directed to address all discovery issues with Magistrate Judge Krause after the case has been referred. Accordingly, Plaintiffs motion for appointment of pro bono counsel is denied without prejudic e at this time. The Clerk of Court is directed to terminate the motion at ECF No. 76, mail a copy of this memorandum endorsement to prose Plaintiff at the address on ECF, and show service on the docket. SO ORDERED.. (Signed by Judge Nelson Stephen Roman on 4/21/2021) (rj) Transmission to Docket Assistant Clerk for processing.
|
|
Filing
70
ORDER. Plaintiff's response to the May 10, 2019 Order to Show Cause is no longer stayed, and Plaintiff is directed to file his response on or before January 10, 2020. The Clerk of the Court is respectfully directed to update the docket to re flect Plaintiff's address, including the correct Department Identification Number (DIN), as listed below. The Clerk of the Court is further requested to serve a copy of this Order, as well as a copy of the May 10, 2019 Order to Show Cause (ECF No. 57) on Plaintiff at the updated address and file proof of service on the docket. SO ORDERED. (Signed by Judge Nelson Stephen Roman on 12/9/19) (yv) Transmission to Docket Assistant Clerk for processing.
|
|
Filing
46
OPINION & ORDER re: 29 MOTION to Dismiss the Complaint. filed by Michael Capra, Murdock, Steven Carpenter. For the foregoing reasons, the Moving Defendants' Motion is GRANTED. The claim against Capra for failure to protect a nd the due process claims are dismissed without prejudice. The Equal Protection claim is dismissed against each of the Moving Defendants with prejudice. Plaintiff is granted leave to re-plead his failure to protect claim against Capra and his due p rocess claims against the appropriate individual(s). Plaintiff is cautioned to include sufficient allegations of personal involvement of such individual(s) in the alleged violations at his disciplinary hearing. To the extent Plaintiff intends to a mend his Complaint, he must do so on or before October 15, 2018. The Clerk of the Court is respectfully requested to terminate the motion at ECF No. 29. The Clerk of the Court is further respectfully requested to mail a copy of this Opinion & Order to Plaintiff's address as listed on ECF and show proof of mailing on the docket. SO ORDERED. (Signed by Judge Nelson Stephen Roman on 9/13/2018) (rj) Transmission to Docket Assistant Clerk for processing.
|
|
Filing
21
SUPPLEMENTAL ORDER: Plaintiff is directed to file an amended complaint naming the newly identified defendants within thirty days of this order. The amended complaint will replace, not supplement, the original complaint. An amended complaint form that Plaintiff should complete is attached to this order. Once Plaintiff has filed an amended complaint, the Court will screen it and, if necessary, issue an order directing the Clerk of Court to complete the appropriate forms with the addresses for the newly named defendants and deliver all documents necessary to effect service to the U.S. Marshals Service. The Clerk of Court is directed to mail a copy of this order, along with a copy of ECF Docs. No. 18 and 19, to Plaintiff, together with an infor mation package, and note service on the docket. The Court certifies under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3) that any appeal from this order would not be taken in good faith, and therefore in forma pauperis status is denied for the purpose of an appeal. Cf Coppedge v. United States, 369 U.S. 438, 444-45 (1962) (holding that an appellant demonstrates good faith when he seeks review of a nonfrivolous issue). (Signed by Judge Nelson Stephen Roman on 6/14/2017) (rj)
|
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.
