Elawyers Elawyers
Ohio| Change

RICHARDSON v. THE CITY OF NEW YORK, 15 CV 543 (LAK)(AJP). (2016)

Court: District Court, S.D. New York Number: infdco20160513820 Visitors: 8
Filed: Apr. 22, 2016
Latest Update: Apr. 22, 2016
Summary: NOTICE OF MOTION LEWIS A. KAPLAN , District Judge . PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that upon the annexed declaration of Howard Eison, dated September 1, 2015; the exhibits attached thereto; the annexed Statement of Undisputed Facts pursuant to Local Civil Rule 56.1; the annexed Memorandum of Law, dated September 1, 2015, and upon all of the pleadings and proceedings heretofore had herein, defendants, by their attorney, the Corporation Counsel of the City of New York, ZACHARY W. CARTER, will move this
More

NOTICE OF MOTION

PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that upon the annexed declaration of Howard Eison, dated September 1, 2015; the exhibits attached thereto; the annexed Statement of Undisputed Facts pursuant to Local Civil Rule 56.1; the annexed Memorandum of Law, dated September 1, 2015, and upon all of the pleadings and proceedings heretofore had herein, defendants, by their attorney, the Corporation Counsel of the City of New York, ZACHARY W. CARTER, will move this Court before the Honorable Lewis A. Kaplan, United States District Court Judge at the United States Courthouse located at 500 Pearl Street, New York, New York for an Order, pursuant to Federal Rules of Civil Procedure Rule 56 and Rule 8(a)(2) and 12(b)(6), granting defendants judgment dismissing the Amended Complaint and action in its entirety, and for such other and further relief as to this Court deems just and proper;

PLEASE TAKE FURTHER NOTICE that pursuant to the order of the Honorable United States Magistrate Judge Andrew J. Peck, dated July 28, 2015, plaintiff's opposition Defendants move for summary judgment dismissing the amended complaint. In a thorough report and recommendation dated November 18, 2015 (the R&R"), Magistrate Judge Andrew J. Peck recommended that the motion be granted in all respects except denied as to plaintiff's (1) Section 1983 claim deliberate indifference and his malpractice claims against defendants Barnes and Corizon, and (2) negligence claims as to Officers Garcia and Simmons. Defendants object to the R&R to the extent it recommended denial of portions of their motion.

I have considered defendants' objections and concluded that they lack merit. According, defendants' motion for summary judgment dismissing the amended complaint [DI 45] is granted in all respects except denied as to plaintiff's (1) Section 1983 claim deliberate indifference and his malpractice claims against defendants Barnes and Corizon, and (2) negligence claims as to Officers Garcia and Simmons. The parties shall file a joint pretrial order in the form prescribed by my individual practices on or before May 23, 2016. The Court will hold a final pretrial conference on June 22, 2016 at 4:30 pm.

SO ORDERED.

Source:  Leagle

Can't find what you're looking for?

Post a free question on our public forum.
Ask a Question
Search for lawyers by practice areas.
Find a Lawyer