Perez v. Dr. John Doe et al, No. 7:2017cv04222 - Document 55 (S.D.N.Y. 2018)

Court Description: OPINION AND ORDER re: 43 MOTION to Dismiss pursuant to 12(b)(6). filed by Ms. Sharpe, Dr. Makram, Baumgarten, Superintendent Lilly, J. Carl Koenigsmann. Defendants' motion to dismiss the amended complaint is GRANTED IN PA RT and DENIED IN PART. The Court certifies pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3) that any appeal from this order would not be taken in good faith, and therefore in forma pauperis status is denied for the purpose of an appeal. See Coppedge v. United States, 369 U.S. 438, 444-45 (1962). The Clerk is instructed to terminate the motion. (Doc. #43). SO ORDERED. (Signed by Judge Vincent L. Briccetti on 8/8/2018) Copies Mailed By Chambers. (mml)

Download PDF
Perez v. Dr. John Doe et al Doc. 55 Dockets.Justia.com

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.