Malcolm v. Honeoye Falls Lima Central School District et al
| Bernice Malcolm |
| Janet Somes, Linda Hunt, Collen Allen, Honeoye Falls Lima Central School District, Michelle Kavanaugh, Richard Rasmussen, Ron Mendrick, Chuck Allen, Shawn Krest and Gary Stottler |
| 6:2011cv06509 |
| October 14, 2011 |
| US District Court for the Western District of New York |
| Rochester Office |
| Monroe |
| David G. Larimer |
| Employment |
| 42 U.S.C. ยง 2000 |
| None |
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
6
ORDER denying plaintiff's motion for reconsideration 4 in its entirety, with prejudice. Plaintiff is again cautioned that she remains permanently enjoined from the pursuit of further pro se actions against the defendants without leave of Cour t, in the manner and to the extent set forth in this Court's September 14, 2010 Decision and Order in a companion case, and that further attempts to pursue claims against the defendants which are patently frivolous, and/or to resurrect claims th at have been repeatedly dismissed in state and federal court, will imminently result in the imposition of sanctions, including but not limited to monetary sanctions. See Malcolm v. Bd. of Educ. of the Honeoye Falls-Lima Central Sch. Dist., 737 F. Supp. 2d 117 (W.D.N.Y. 2010). Plaintiff's motion for service of process by the U.S. Marshal 5 is denied. Signed by Hon. David G. Larimer on 11/14/11. (EMA)
|
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 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.
