From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Pearson-Fraser v. Bell Atlantic

United States District Court, S.D. New York
Feb 5, 2002
01 civ. 2343 (WK) (S.D.N.Y. Feb. 5, 2002)

Summary

dismissing discrimination claim where plaintiff fails to allege that she was qualified for the pertinent position

Summary of this case from Dansler-Hill v. Rochester Institute of Technology

Opinion

01 civ. 2343 (WK).

February 5, 2002


ORDER


We hereby DENY pro se Plaintiff Joan Pearson-Fraser's ("Plaintiff") motion for an Order to Show Cause. W e find that Plaintiff has failed to meet the standard set forth in Local Civil Rule 6.1(d) of the Local Civil Rules of the United States District Court for the Southern and Eastern Districts of New York, which provides in relevant part that "[n]o . . . order to show cause . . . will be granted except upon a clear and specific showing by affidavit of good and sufficient reasons why a procedure other than by notice of motion is necessary."

SO ORDERED.


Summaries of

Pearson-Fraser v. Bell Atlantic

United States District Court, S.D. New York
Feb 5, 2002
01 civ. 2343 (WK) (S.D.N.Y. Feb. 5, 2002)

dismissing discrimination claim where plaintiff fails to allege that she was qualified for the pertinent position

Summary of this case from Dansler-Hill v. Rochester Institute of Technology
Case details for

Pearson-Fraser v. Bell Atlantic

Case Details

Full title:JOAN PEARSON-FRASER, Plaintiff, against BELL ATLANTIC, Defendant

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

Date published: Feb 5, 2002

Citations

01 civ. 2343 (WK) (S.D.N.Y. Feb. 5, 2002)

Citing Cases

Dansler-Hill v. Rochester Institute of Technology

(Dkt. #1 at 9; Dkr. #3-3, Exh. G at ¶ 5). See generally Faruq v. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc., 2006 U.S. Dist. LEXIS…