Hughes v. McWilliams et al, No. 1:2004cv07030 - Document 103 (S.D.N.Y. 2009)
Court Description: OPINION AND ORDER re:#98048 63 MOTION for Reconsideration filed by Terry Hughes. Plaintiff vigorously disputes the Court's factual and legal conclusions, but does not state any reason for the Court to reconsider its decision to dismiss his claims. The Court DENIES Plaintiffs' motion for reconsideration. SO ORDERED. (Signed by Judge Kimba M. Wood on 9/16/2009) (tve) Modified on 9/23/2009 (jab).
Download PDF
<![CDATA[
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK --------------------------------------X TERRY HUGHES, Plaintiffs, 04 CV 7030 (KMW) OPINION AND ORDER -againstSADDLE RIVER POLICE CHIEF TIMOTHY MCWILLIAMS, et al., Defendants. --------------------------------------X KIMBA M. WOOD, U.S.D.J. Plaintiff Terry Hughes ( Plaintiff ), proceeding pro se, brought this action against Defendants, who are New York state police and prison officials and officers of the Federal Bureau of Investigations. Plaintiff alleges that Defendants committed various unconstitutional acts against him. In a June 18, 2008 order, the Court dismissed all but two of Plaintiff s claims. Plaintiff moves for reconsideration of the Court s decision to dismiss his claims.1 The standard for a motion for reconsideration is strict. A court will generally deny reconsideration unless the moving party can establish: (1) that the court overlooked controlling decisions or data; (2) that there has been a change in 1 Plaintiff does not specify under which rule he seeks reconsideration of the Order. The Court treats Plaintiff s motion as one brought pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 59(e). 1
]]>
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You
should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google
Privacy Policy and
Terms of Service apply.
