Moco v. Janik

Moco v. Janik

Plaintiff:	Robert Moco
Defendant:	Jm. Janik
Case Number:	1:2017cv00398
Filed:	May 10, 2017
Court:	US District Court for the Western District of New York
Office:	Buffalo Office
County:	Oneida
Presiding Judge:	Frank P. Geraci
Nature of Suit:	Civil Rights
Cause of Action:	42 U.S.C. § 1983
Jury Demanded By:	Plaintiff

Follow case documents by RSS

Available Case Documents

The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:

Date Filed	Document Text
November 15, 2021	Filing 83 DECISION AND ORDER: Defendants' motion for summary judgment (ECF No. 70) is GRANTED, and Moco's cross-motion for summary judgment (ECF No. 75) is DENIED. All claims against Defendants are dismissed with prejudice. The only remaining claim is Janik's counterclaim for battery against Moco. By separate order, the Court will schedule a status conference to hear from the parties on the progress of this action. SO ORDERED. Signed by Hon. Frank P. Geraci, Jr. on 11/15/2021. (MFM)
August 8, 2019	Filing 34 DECISION AND ORDER: Defendants' 23 Motion to Dismiss is GRANTED IN PART and DENIED IN PART. Specifically, Plaintiff's excessive force and denial of medical care claims related to Defendants applying tight handcuffs on January 27, 2016 is DISMISSED. Four claims will proceed to discovery: two for excessive force during the alleged assaults on January 27 and January 29 or 30, 2016 and two for denial of medical care after both incidents. By separate order, the Court will refer this case to a United States Magistrate Judge for pretrial proceedings. SO ORDERED. Signed by Hon. Frank P. Geraci, Jr. on 8/8/2019. A copy of the NEF and Decision and Order were mailed to Plaintiff. (AFM)

Date Filed

Document Text

November 15, 2021

Filing 83 DECISION AND ORDER: Defendants' motion for summary judgment (ECF No. 70) is GRANTED, and Moco's cross-motion for summary judgment (ECF No. 75) is DENIED. All claims against Defendants are dismissed with prejudice. The only remaining claim is Janik's counterclaim for battery against Moco. By separate order, the Court will schedule a status conference to hear from the parties on the progress of this action. SO ORDERED. Signed by Hon. Frank P. Geraci, Jr. on 11/15/2021. (MFM)

August 8, 2019

Filing 34 DECISION AND ORDER: Defendants' 23 Motion to Dismiss is GRANTED IN PART and DENIED IN PART. Specifically, Plaintiff's excessive force and denial of medical care claims related to Defendants applying tight handcuffs on January 27, 2016 is DISMISSED. Four claims will proceed to discovery: two for excessive force during the alleged assaults on January 27 and January 29 or 30, 2016 and two for denial of medical care after both incidents. By separate order, the Court will refer this case to a United States Magistrate Judge for pretrial proceedings. SO ORDERED. Signed by Hon. Frank P. Geraci, Jr. on 8/8/2019. A copy of the NEF and Decision and Order were mailed to Plaintiff. (AFM)

Access additional case information on PACER

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 Western District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: Moco v. Janik
Search News	[ Google News \| Marketwatch \| Wall Street Journal \| Financial Times \| New York Times ]
Search Web	[ Unicourt \| Legal Web \| Google \| Bing \| Yahoo \| Ask ]
Plaintiff: Robert Moco
Search News	[ Google News \| Marketwatch \| Wall Street Journal \| Financial Times \| New York Times ]
Search Finance	[ Google Finance \| Yahoo Finance \| Hoovers \| SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web	[ Unicourt \| Justia Dockets \| Legal Web \| Google \| Bing \| Yahoo \| Ask ]
Defendant: Jm. Janik
Search News	[ Google News \| Marketwatch \| Wall Street Journal \| Financial Times \| New York Times ]
Search Finance	[ Google Finance \| Yahoo Finance \| Hoovers \| SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web	[ Unicourt \| Justia Dockets \| Legal Web \| Google \| Bing \| Yahoo \| Ask ]

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.

Why Is My Information Online?