Sadowski v. Feinberg

Second Circuit

Sadowski v. Feinberg

131 F. App'x 776

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit

DecidedMay 23, 2005

DocketNo. 04-4582

StatusPublished

This text of 131 F. App'x 776 (Sadowski v. Feinberg) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Sadowski v. Feinberg, 131 F. App'x 776 (2d Cir. 2005).

Pincite

Opinion

SUMMARY ORDER

Appellant, Joseph A.F. Sadowski, pro se and in forma pauperis, appeals from the sua sponte dismissal by the United States District Court (Hurley, J.), of his complaint pursuant to 42 U.S.C. §§ 1983 and 1985.

The parties’ familiarity with the facts is assumed. We affirm the judgment of the district court, for substantially the reasons given by the district court in its analysis. See, Order, Sadowski v. Riordan, et al., No. 04-Cv-1680 (DRH), (E.D.N.Y. July 20, 2004).

The judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

SUMMARY ORDER

Appellant, Joseph A.F. Sadowski, pro se and in forma pauperis, appeals from the sua sponte dismissal by the United States District Court (Hurley, J.), of his complaint pursuant to 42 U.S.C. §§ 1983 and 1985.

The parties’ familiarity with the facts is assumed. We affirm the judgment of the district court, for substantially the reasons given by the district court in its analysis. See, Order, Sadowski v. Riordan, et al., No. 04-Cv-1680 (DRH), (E.D.N.Y. July 20, 2004).

The judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

131 F. App'x 776, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/sadowski-v-feinberg-ca2-2005.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack