Frederick v. Shehan et al
Plaintiff: Michael Frederick
Defendant: Michael Shehan, Patrick Murphy, Michael Robyck, Anthony Hicks, Jamie Robinson and Donald Holton
Case Number: 6:2010cv06527
Filed: September 15, 2010
Court: US District Court for the Western District of New York
Office: Rochester Office
County: Chemung
Presiding Judge: Charles J. Siragusa
Nature of Suit: Civil Rights
Cause of Action: 42:1983
Jury Demanded By: Plaintiff

Available Case Documents

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

Date Filed Document Text
August 2, 2017 Opinion or Order Filing 114 DECISION AND ORDER denying 107 Motion to Appoint Counsel. SO ORDERED. Signed by Hon. Elizabeth A. Wolford on 8/2/17. (JPL) (A copy of this Decision and Order has been mailed to Plaintiff)
April 27, 2017 Opinion or Order Filing 103 DECISION AND ORDER denying 93 Plaintiff's Motion to Appoint Counsel. SO ORDERED. Signed by Hon. Elizabeth A. Wolford on 4/27/17. (JPL) (A copy of this Decision and Order has been mailed to Plaintiff)
July 13, 2015 Opinion or Order Filing 74 DECISION AND ORDER denying 68 Sgt. Holton's Motion for Summary Judgment. Sgt. Holton will remain a defendant in this case. (Copy of Decision and Order sent by first class mail to Plaintiff.) Signed by Hon. Michael A. Telesca on 7/13/15. (JMC)
July 29, 2014 Opinion or Order Filing 64 -CLERK TO FOLLOW UP- DECISION AND ORDER granting in part and denying in part 52 Motion for Summary Judgment. Defendants request to dismiss the entire amended complaint because it alleges only official capacity claims against Defendants is denied a s moot in light of Plaintiffs recent, unopposed amendment of the amended claim to specifically indicate that he is suing all Defendants in their individual capacities. Defendants request to dismiss Plaintiffs claims against Defendants in their offic ial capacities is granted. Defendants request to dismiss Plaintiffs claims against Acting Supt. Sheahan (failure to investigate grievances and supervisory liability for alleged due process errors by CHO Esgrow during the disciplinary hearing) based on their lack of personal involvement is granted. Defendants request to dismiss Plaintiffs claim against Sgt. Holton (failure to supervise) is denied without prejudice with leave to renew. Accordingly, Acting Supt. Sheahan is terminated as a Defenda nt from this action. Defendants request to dismiss the due process claim against CO Murphy for filing a false misbehavior report is granted. The following claims and Defendant remain pending: excessive use of force in violation of the Eighth Amendme nt against CO Vandergrift, CO Murphy, CO Robinson, and CO Robyck; failure to supervise against Sgt. Holton. The Clerk of the Court is requested to terminate Acting Supt. Sheahan as a defendant and to amend the caption accordingly. Signed by Hon. Michael A. Telesca on 7/29/14. (JMC)
December 17, 2012 Opinion or Order Filing 50 DECISION & ORDER denying without prejudice 48 Motion to Appoint Counsel. It is plaintiff's responsibility to retain an attorney or press forward with this lawsuit pro se. Signed by Hon. Marian W. Payson on 12/17/2012. (KAH)
May 17, 2012 Opinion or Order Filing 28 DECISION ORDER denying without prejudice 20 Motion to Appoint Counsel; denying without prejudice 17 Motion to Appoint Counsel. It is plaintiff's responsibility to retain an attorney or press forward with this lawsuit pro se. Signed by Hon. Marian W. Payson on 5/17/2012. (KAH)
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: Frederick v. Shehan et al
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Plaintiff: Michael Frederick
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: Michael Shehan
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: Patrick Murphy
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: Michael Robyck
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: Anthony Hicks
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: Jamie Robinson
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: Donald Holton
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?