Allevav.New York City Department of Investigation

Not overruled or negatively treated on appealinfoCoverage
United States Court of Appeals, Second CircuitMar 9, 2011
413 Fed. Appx. 361 (2d Cir. 2011)

Cases citing this case

How cited

  • Ratajack v. Brewster Fire Dep't

    …See, e.g. , Alleva v. N.Y.C. Dep't of Investigation , 696 F.Supp.2d 273, 278 (E.D.N.Y.2010) (“The [c]omplaint…

  • Leon v. Dep't of Educ.

    …Further, Plaintiff must prove that: “(1) [s]he was subjected to harassment, based on [her] age, that was…

lock 3 Citing caseskeyboard_arrow_right

No. 10-1340-cv.

March 9, 2011.

UPON DUE CONSIDERATION, it is hereby ORDERED, ADJUDGED, AND DECREED that the district court judgment is AFFIRMED.

John Alleva, Staten Island, NY, pro se.

Kristin M. Helmers and Norman Corenthal, Assistant Corporation Counsel, for Michael A. Cardozo, Corporation Counsel of the City of New York, New York, NY, for Appellee.



Plaintiff-Appellant John Alleva, pro se, appeals from the March 16, 2010 judgment of the United States District Court for the Eastern District of New York (Block, J.) granting the Appellee's motion for summary judgment. We assume the parties' familiarity with the underlying facts and the procedural history of the case.

This Court reviews an order granting summary judgment de novo and focuses on whether the district court properly concluded that there were no genuine issues as to any material fact and that the moving party was entitled to judgment as a matter of law. See Miller v. Wolpoff Abramson, L.L.P., 321 F.3d 292, 300 (2d Cir. 2003). In determining whether there are genuine issues of material fact, this Court is "required to resolve all ambiguities and draw all permissible factual inferences in favor of the party against whom summary judgment is sought." Terry v. Ashcroft, 336 F.3d 128, 137 (2d Cir. 2003) (internal quotations omitted).

After reviewing the appellant's contentions on appeal and the record of proceedings below, we affirm for substantially the same reasons stated by the district court in its thorough opinion. We have considered all of the appellant's arguments and find them to be without merit.

Accordingly, the judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED.

An alternative to Lexis that does not break the bank.

Casetext does more than Lexis for less than $65 per month.