From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Ramos v. Eddy

United States District Court, Southern District of New York
Jun 17, 2021
21 Civ. 1649 (GWG) (S.D.N.Y. Jun. 17, 2021)

Opinion

21 Civ. 1649 (GWG)

06-17-2021

FRANK RAMOS, Plaintiff, v. KYLE W. EDDY, etal., Defendants.


ORDER

GABRIEL W. GORENSTEIN, United State Magistrate Judge

The Court is somewhat mystified by the course of events with respect to its May 11, 2021, Order. Because of the Order's importance, the Court made sure the docket entry included the words "As further set forth in this Order" to alert the reader of the docket entry that the docket entry did not fully describe the Order (as is usually the case). Counsel's affidavit does not explain why these words did not engender further investigation by counsel.

Be that as it may, the Court accepts that counsel did not act in bad faith and therefore no sanction will issue. Additionally, the Court accepts that there is no need to further question the existence of subject matter jurisdiction.

SO ORDERED.


Summaries of

Ramos v. Eddy

United States District Court, Southern District of New York
Jun 17, 2021
21 Civ. 1649 (GWG) (S.D.N.Y. Jun. 17, 2021)
Case details for

Ramos v. Eddy

Case Details

Full title:FRANK RAMOS, Plaintiff, v. KYLE W. EDDY, etal., Defendants.

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

Date published: Jun 17, 2021

Citations

21 Civ. 1649 (GWG) (S.D.N.Y. Jun. 17, 2021)