Stoeckley et al v. The City of New York et al
Filing 40
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER (Corrected) For the foregoing reasons, plaintiffs' motion for leave to file a second amended complaint [DI 28] is denied in all respects. This ruling is without prejudice to plaintiffs' filing a state court complaint al leging exclusively the state law claims proposed to be asserted in the proposed second amended complaint. As this ruling is dispositive of the Section 1983 claims against defendant Velazquez, the Section 1983 and state law tort claims against him are dismissed for failure to state a claim upon which relief may be granted and for lack of subject matter jurisdiction, respectively. The Clerk shall enter final judgment dismissing the action.SO ORDERED. (Signed by Judge Lewis A. Kaplan on 8/8/2010) (jmi)
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
