Rutherford v. Westchester County et al
| Rayvon Rutherford |
| Westchester County, Manual Medoza, Penny Stuart, Darnell Flax, Warden Middleton and Correctional Officer Brown |
| 1:2018cv04872 |
| May 31, 2018 |
| US District Court for the Southern District of New York |
| White Plains Office |
| Westchester |
| 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
111
CLERK'S JUDGMENT re: 110 Order on Motion to Dismiss/Lack of Prosecution, in favor of Aramark Correctional Services LLC, Correctional Officer Brown, Westchester County, Darnell Flax, Donna Blackman, Eric Middleton, Francis Delgrosso, Hecto r Lopez, James Birrittella, Joseph K. Spano, Karl Vollmer, Manuel Mendoza, Penny Stuart against Rayvon Rutherford. It is hereby ORDERED, ADJUDGED AND DECREED: That for the reasons stated in the Court's Memo-Endorsed Order dated September 8, 202 1, Application to dismiss this case for failure to prosecute is granted. Mr. Rutherford has not contacted the Court, nor updated his contact information for well over a year. Moreover, Mr. Rutherford ignored the Court's Order to Show Cause, file d in May 2021. While dismissal is an extreme remedy, al the relevant factors justify dismissal in this case for the reasons noted herein and in the Court's May 2021 Order. The case is therefore dismissed without prejudice. (Signed by Clerk of Court Ruby Krajick on 9/9/2021) (Attachments: # 1 Notice of Right to Appeal) (dt)
|
|
Filing
110
ORDER granting 109 Motion to Dismiss for Lack of Prosecution. Application to dismiss this case for failure to prosecute is granted. Mr. Rutherford has not contacted the Court, nor updated his contact information for well over a year. Moreove r, Mr. Rutherford ignored the Court's Order to Show Cause, filed in May 2021. While dismissal is an extreme remedy, all the relevant factors justify dismissal in this case for the reasons noted herein and in the Court's May 2021 Order. The case is therefore dismissed without prejudice. (Signed by Judge Kenneth M. Karas on 9/8/2021) (tg)
|
|
Filing
86
OPINION AND ORDER: For the reasons stated above, Defendants' Motion To Dismiss is granted. Because this is the first adjudication of Plaintiff's claims, the dismissal is without prejudice. If Plaintiff wishes to file a third amended co mplaint, Plaintiff must do so within 30 days of the date of this Opinion. Plaintiff should include within that amended complaint all changes to correct the deficiencies identified in this Opinion that Plaintiff wishes the Court to consider. Plai ntiff is advised that the third amended complaint will replace, not supplement, the SAC. The amended complaint must contain all of the claims, factual allegations, and exhibits that Plaintiff wishes the Court to consider. If Plaintiff fails to abide by the 30-day deadline, his claims may be dismissed with prejudice. The Clerk is respectfully directed to terminate the pending Motion, (see Dkt. No. 69), and mail a copy of this Order to Plaintiff. SO ORDERED. (Signed by Judge Kenneth M. Karas on 1/28/2020) (jca) Transmission to Docket Assistant Clerk for processing.
|
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.
