Shahid v. City of New York

Second Circuit

Shahid v. City of New York

170 F. App'x 193

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit

DecidedMarch 10, 2006

DocketNo. 05-4803

StatusPublished

This text of 170 F. App'x 193 (Shahid v. City of New York) 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

Shahid v. City of New York, 170 F. App'x 193 (2d Cir. 2006).

Pincite

Opinion

SUMMARY ORDER

ON CONSIDERATION WHEREOF, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED, ADJUDGED, AND DECREED that the judgment of the District Court be and it hereby is AFFIRMED.

Abdus Shahid and Halima Ansari, plaintiff-appellants, pro se, appeal from the dismissal of their 42 U.S.C. § 1983 complaint by the United States District Court for the Eastern District of New York (Garaufis, The parties’ familiarity with the facts is assumed.

Construing any well-pleaded factual allegations in the complaint in the plaintiffs’ favor, this Court affirms the dismissal because the plaintiffs can prove no set of facts in support of their claims, which would entitle them to relief. Taylor v. Vermont Dept. of Educ., 313 F.3d 768, 776 (2d Cir.2002) (quoting, Lerman v. Bd. of Elections, 232 F.3d 135, 139-40 (2d Cir. 2000)). The magistrate’s opinion expressed the determination that “even when liberally construed to name [Fernando] Maldonado, plaintiffs’ complaint fails to state a claim upon which relief can be granted.” We do not review that portion of the district court ruling because it is clear that Maldonado was not a defendant.

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

ON CONSIDERATION WHEREOF, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED, ADJUDGED, AND DECREED that the judgment of the District Court be and it hereby is AFFIRMED.

Abdus Shahid and Halima Ansari, plaintiff-appellants, pro se, appeal from the dismissal of their 42 U.S.C. § 1983 complaint by the United States District Court for the Eastern District of New York (Garaufis, The parties’ familiarity with the facts is assumed.

Construing any well-pleaded factual allegations in the complaint in the plaintiffs’ favor, this Court affirms the dismissal because the plaintiffs can prove no set of facts in support of their claims, which would entitle them to relief. Taylor v. Vermont Dept. of Educ., 313 F.3d 768, 776 (2d Cir.2002) (quoting, Lerman v. Bd. of Elections, 232 F.3d 135, 139-40 (2d Cir. 2000)). The magistrate’s opinion expressed the determination that “even when liberally construed to name [Fernando] Maldonado, plaintiffs’ complaint fails to state a claim upon which relief can be granted.” We do not review that portion of the district court ruling because it is clear that Maldonado was not a defendant.

The judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

170 F. App'x 193, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/shahid-v-city-of-new-york-ca2-2006.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack