From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Mckenzie v. City of New York

United States District Court, Southern District of New York
Jul 6, 2021
18 Civil 6913 (VEC) (S.D.N.Y. Jul. 6, 2021)

Opinion

18 Civil 6913 (VEC)

07-06-2021

CECIL MCKENZIE, Plaintiff, v. THE CITY OF NEW YORK, MARQUIS CROSS, JOSE CALLE-PALOMEQUE, AND ROBERT ZEVON, Defendants.


JUDGMENT

It is hereby ORDERED, ADJUDGED AND DECREED: That for the reasons stated in the Court's Order dated July 2, 2021, the R&R is adopted in full, Defendants' motion for summary judgment is granted, and this case is DISMISSED. Judge Gorenstein applied the correct legal standard. He rightly recognized that as a pro se party, McKenzie's filings should be construed "liberally to raise the strongest arguments that they suggest." R&R, Dkt. 94 at 7 (citing Willey v. Kirkpatrick, 801 F.3d 51, 62 (2d Cir. 2015)); see also Triestman v. Fed. Bureau of Prisons, 470 F.3d 471, 475 (2d Cir. 2006) (collecting cases finding that pro se parties must be accorded a "special solicitude"). Applying this standard, Judge Gorenstein was correct to construe McKenzie's claims as ones brought pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983, for violations of his constitutional rights to be free from excessive force and malicious prosecution; accordingly, the case is closed.

RUBY J. KRAJICK Clerk of Court.


Summaries of

Mckenzie v. City of New York

United States District Court, Southern District of New York
Jul 6, 2021
18 Civil 6913 (VEC) (S.D.N.Y. Jul. 6, 2021)
Case details for

Mckenzie v. City of New York

Case Details

Full title:CECIL MCKENZIE, Plaintiff, v. THE CITY OF NEW YORK, MARQUIS CROSS, JOSE…

Court:United States District Court, Southern District of New York

Date published: Jul 6, 2021

Citations

18 Civil 6913 (VEC) (S.D.N.Y. Jul. 6, 2021)