Opinion
14 Civ. 190
05-13-2016
JIMMY RIBOT, Plaintiff, v. City of New York, et al. Defendants.
APPEARANCES: Pro Se JIMMY RIBOT 14-R-2192 Queensboro Corr. Fac. 47-04 Van Dam Street Long Island City, NY 11101 Attorneys for Defendants THE NEW YORK CITY LAW DEPARTMENT 100 Church Street New York, NY 10007 By: Daniel H. Oliner, Esq.
OPINION APPEARANCES:
Pro Se
JIMMY RIBOT
14-R-2192
Queensboro Corr. Fac.
47-04 Van Dam Street
Long Island City, NY 11101
Attorneys for Defendants
THE NEW YORK CITY LAW DEPARTMENT
100 Church Street
New York, NY 10007
By: Daniel H. Oliner, Esq. Sweet, D.J.
The Court by order of January 25, 2016 ("the January 25 Order") treated the December 29, 2015 letter of the Defendants requesting permission to move for summary judgment as a motion for summary judgment and the January 21, 2016 letter of the Plaintiff, pro se, as a memorandum in opposition. The Defendants have submitted an additional letter as a reply on February 19, 2016.
Regrettably, upon reconsideration, the January 25 Order has proven unsuccessful in simplifying the issues in this action in which the Plaintiff, pro se, alleges that he was falsely arrested. Compliance with Local Rule 56.1 is appropriate, particularly in view of the status of the Plaintiff who is incarcerated.
For these reasons, the December 29, 2015 motion of the Defendants is denied with leave granted to renew.
It is so ordered. New York, NY
May 13, 2016
/s/ _________
ROBERT W. SWEET
U.S.D.J.