Trahan v. Suffolk County Correctional Facility et al
||C.O. Christopher Garzadas, Sgt. Horl, Suffolk County Correctional Facility, Sheriff Vincent Demarco and C.O. Phil Capozzola
||August 27, 2012
||New York Eastern District Court
||Central Islip Office
||Arlene R. Lindsay
|Nature of Suit:
||Prisoner: Civil Rights
|Cause of Action:
||42:1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
|Jury Demanded By:
Available Case Documents
The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:
|Date Filed||#||Document Text|
|November 26, 2012
ORDER granting 2 Motion for Leave to Proceed in forma pauperis; denying 4 Motion to Appoint Counsel. For the reasons set forth above, Plaintiff's application to proceed in forma pauperis is granted, but the Complaint is sua sponte d ismissed as against the Suffolk County Correctional Facility and Sheriff DeMarco pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §§ 1915(e)(2), 1915A(b). Party Vincent Demarco and Suffolk County Correctional Facility terminated. The claims against Defendants Capo zzola, Horl and Garzadas shall proceed and the Clerk of the Court is directed to forward copies of the Summonses, the Complaint and this Order to the United States Marshals Service for service upon Defendants Capozzola, Horl and Garzadas forthwith. T he application for the appointment of pro bono counsel is denied with leave to renew when this case is ready for trial, if so warranted at that time. The Court certifies pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3) that any appeal from this Order would not be taken in good faith and therefore in forma pauperis status is denied for the purpose of any appeal. So Ordered by Judge Joanna Seybert on 11/26/2012. C/M (Valle, Christine)
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 Eastern District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System
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.