From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Dudley v. Corrections Officer Trent Pendagrass

United States District Court, E.D. New York
Oct 29, 2008
06 CV 216 (RJD) (LB) (E.D.N.Y. Oct. 29, 2008)

Summary

granting summary judgment for defendants on plaintiff's § 1983 claims

Summary of this case from Dudley v. Meekins

Opinion

06 CV 216 (RJD) (LB).

October 29, 2008


ORDER


Pro se plaintiff Maurice Dudley brings this action against defendants pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983, alleging false arrest and imprisonment, excessive force, and deliberate indifference to his serious medical need. On October 18, 2007, the Court adopted Magistrate Judge Lois Bloom's Report Recommendation, thereby granting plaintiff's motion for default judgment against defendants Meekins and Pendergrass. Those defendants requested reconsideration, and the Court afforded them ten days to file a motion to vacate the default. Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 626(b), that motion was referred to Magistrate Judge Bloom, and on August 14, 2008, Magistrate Judge Bloom issued a Report Recommendation recommending that the default judgment be vacated.

On August 20, 2008, plaintiff wrote to the Court requesting a sixty-day extension of time to file objections. The Court granted plaintiff an extension until October 24, 2008. As of October 28, 2008, no objections have been filed, and so the Court adopts the Report in full. Defendants' motion to vacate the default is granted.

SO ORDERED.


Summaries of

Dudley v. Corrections Officer Trent Pendagrass

United States District Court, E.D. New York
Oct 29, 2008
06 CV 216 (RJD) (LB) (E.D.N.Y. Oct. 29, 2008)

granting summary judgment for defendants on plaintiff's § 1983 claims

Summary of this case from Dudley v. Meekins
Case details for

Dudley v. Corrections Officer Trent Pendagrass

Case Details

Full title:MAURICE DUDLEY Plaintiff, v. CORRECTIONS OFFICER TRENT PENDAGRASS; VALERIE…

Court:United States District Court, E.D. New York

Date published: Oct 29, 2008

Citations

06 CV 216 (RJD) (LB) (E.D.N.Y. Oct. 29, 2008)

Citing Cases

Westchester Fire Ins. Co. v. Tyree Serv. Corp.

The second factor for the Court to consider is whether the Defendants have demonstrated the existence of a…

U.S. Commodity Futures Trading Comm'n v. Vincent Patrick Mccrudden, Managed Accounts Asset Mgmt., LLC

With respect to whether the movant has a meritorious defense, the defendant must go further than merely…