Castillo v. Snedeker
This text of Castillo v. Snedeker (Castillo v. Snedeker) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court, S.D. New York primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK ---------------------------------------------------------------------X PEDRO CASTILLO,
Plaintiff, 21 CIVIL 11109 (PMH)
-v- JUDGMENT
C.O. ROBERT C. SNEDEKER, DONALD VENETTOZZI, C.H.O. KATHERINE HENLEY,
Defendants. ---------------------------------------------------------------------X
It is hereby ORDERED, ADJUDGED AND DECREED: That for the reasons stated in the Court's Opinion & Order dated July 8, 2024, the Court GRANTS the motion to dismiss Plaintiff's claim against Snedeker regarding the false misbehavior report with prejudice. "Although courts generally grant a pro se plaintiff leave to amend a complaint to cure its shortcomings, leave to amend may be denied if the plaintiff has already been given an opportunity to amend but has failed to cure the complaints deficiencies." Amaker v. Gerbing, No. 17-CV-03520, 2022 WL 463312, at *8 (S.D.N.Y. Feb. 15, 2022) (cleaned up). Moreover, leave to amend is not necessary when it would be futile." Reed v. Friedman Mgmt. Corp., 541 F. Appx 40, 41 (2d Cir. 2013) (citing Cuoco v. Moritsugu, 222 F.3d 99, 112 (2d Cir. 2000)). Having been given the opportunity to cure the Complaints deficiencies with respect to the remaining claim, which was specifically and fully identified in the Prior Order, and having failed to so, Plaintiffs Fourteenth Amendment due process claim against Snedeker is dismissed with prejudice because any amendment would be futile. The Court certifies under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3) that any appeal from this Opinion and Order would not be taken in good faith, and therefore in forma pauperis status 1s denied for the purpose of an appeal. Cf. Coppedge v. United States, 369 U.S. 438, 444-45 (1962) (holding that an appellant demonstrates good faith when he seeks review of a nonfrivolous issue). Accordingly, the case is closed. Dated: New York, New York July 8, 2024
DANIEL ORTIZ Acting Clerk of Court
BY: ER Deputy Clerk
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
Castillo v. Snedeker, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/castillo-v-snedeker-nysd-2024.