Flannery v. City of Rochester et al
| Amanda Flannery |
| City of Rochester, Paul Romano, John Doe Police Officers 1-200, County of Monroe, Richard Roe Sheriff's Deputies 1-200, Todd Baxter and The City of Rochester |
| 6:2022cv06101 |
| March 1, 2022 |
| US District Court for the Western District of New York |
| Frank P Geraci |
| Civil Rights: Other |
| 28 U.S.C. ยง 1331 Federal Question: Other Civil Rights |
| Both |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on November 10, 2022. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing 11
REPLY/RESPONSE to re #10 Memorandum in Opposition to Motion to Partially Dismiss Complaint for Failure to State a Claim filed by Paul Romano, The City of Rochester. (Jones, Peachie)
|
|
Filing 10
MEMORANDUM in Opposition re #6 MOTION TO DISMISS FOR FAILURE TO STATE A CLAIM filed by Amanda Flannery. (Shields, Elliot)
|
|
Filing 9
TEXT SCHEDULING ORDER: City Defendants filed a partial motion to dismiss. ECF No. #6 . Responses due 3/25/2022. Replies due 4/8/2022. The Court will review the submissions and determine if oral argument is necessary and, if so, will notify the parties of the date and time. SO ORDERED. Signed by Hon. Frank P. Geraci, Jr. on 3/4/22. (BJJ)
|
|
Filing 8
NOTICE of Appearance by Adam M. Clark on behalf of Todd Baxter, County of Monroe, Richard Roe Sheriff's Deputies 1-200 (Clark, Adam)
|
|
Filing 7
TEXT ORDER granting #4 Motion for Extension of Time to Answer. County Defendants' answer due on or before 5/1/2022. SO ORDERED. Signed by Hon. Frank P. Geraci, Jr. on 3/3/22. (BJJ)
|
|
Filing 6
MOTION TO DISMISS FOR FAILURE TO STATE A CLAIM by Paul Romano, The City of Rochester. (Attachments: #1 Declaration, #2 Memorandum in Support)(Jones, Peachie)
|
|
Filing 5
NOTICE of Appearance by Peachie L. Jones on behalf of Paul Romano, The City of Rochester (Jones, Peachie)
|
|
Filing 4
MOTION for Extension of Time to File Answer on Consent by Todd Baxter, County of Monroe, Richard Roe Sheriff's Deputies 1-200.(Rodi, Maria)
|
|
Filing 3
CONTINUATION OF EXHIBITS by The City of Rochester. to #1 Notice of Removal, filed by The City of Rochester. (Jones, Peachie)
|
|
E-Filing Notification: re #1 NOTICE OF REMOVAL - Attorney is directed to file a civil cover sheet, pursuant to Local Rule 3. No judge assignment will be made until filing is entered on the docket. Please utilize the Continuation of Exhibits event, located within the Responses and Replies category. (TMK)
|
|
Case Assigned to Hon. Frank P. Geraci, Jr. Notification to Chambers of on-line civil case opening. (TMK)
|
|
Notice of Availability of Magistrate Judge: A United States Magistrate of this Court is available to conduct all proceedings in this civil action in accordance with 28 U.S.C. 636c and FRCP 73. The Notice, Consent, and Reference of a Civil Action to a Magistrate Judge form (AO-85) is available for download at #http://www.uscourts.gov/services-forms/forms. (TMK)
|
|
AUTOMATIC REFERRAL to Mediation The ADR Plan is available for download at #http://www.nywd.uscourts.gov/alternative-dispute-resolution.(TMK)
|
|
Filing 2
NOTICE of Appearance by Elliot Dolby Shields on behalf of Amanda Flannery (Shields, Elliot)
|
|
Filing 1
NOTICE OF REMOVAL by City of Rochester from Monroe County Supreme Court, case number E2021 008134. (Filing fee $ 402 receipt number ANYWDC-4514047), filed by City of Rochester. (Attachments: #1 Appendix Index to Notice of Removal)(Jones, Peachie)
|
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 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.
