Santiago v. New York City Police Department

Second Circuit

Santiago v. New York City Police Department

329 F. App'x 328

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit

DecidedJuly 20, 2009

DocketNo. 08-0016-cv

StatusPublished

This text of 329 F. App'x 328 (Santiago v. New York City Police Department) 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

Santiago v. New York City Police Department, 329 F. App'x 328 (2d Cir. 2009).

Pincite

Opinion

SUMMARY ORDER

Appellant Elmer Santiago, pro se, appeals the district court’s grant of summary judgment dismissing his complaint alleging violations of the Family and Medical Leave Act (“FMLA”) and the Americans with Disabilities Act (“ADA”). We assume the [329]*329parties’ familiarity with the underlying facts, the procedural history of the case, and the issues on appeal.

We review a district court’s order granting summary judgment de novo, and ask whether the court properly concluded that there were no genuine issues of 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).

After reviewing all of Santiago’s contentions on appeal and the record, we AFFIRM the judgment below for substantially the reasons stated by the district court in its thorough opinion and order.

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

SUMMARY ORDER

Appellant Elmer Santiago, pro se, appeals the district court’s grant of summary judgment dismissing his complaint alleging violations of the Family and Medical Leave Act (“FMLA”) and the Americans with Disabilities Act (“ADA”). We assume the [329]*329parties’ familiarity with the underlying facts, the procedural history of the case, and the issues on appeal.

We review a district court’s order granting summary judgment de novo, and ask whether the court properly concluded that there were no genuine issues of 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).

After reviewing all of Santiago’s contentions on appeal and the record, we AFFIRM the judgment below for substantially the reasons stated by the district court in its thorough opinion and order.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

329 F. App'x 328, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/santiago-v-new-york-city-police-department-ca2-2009.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack