From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Schmiege v. Deputy of Health Henton

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK
Jan 21, 2021
19 CIVIL 7229 (PMH) (S.D.N.Y. Jan. 21, 2021)

Opinion

19 CIVIL 7229 (PMH)

01-21-2021

BRIAN E. SCHMIEGE, Plaintiff, v. DEPUTY OF HEALTH HENTON and DR. ALAM, Defendants.


JUDGMENT

It is hereby ORDERED, ADJUDGED AND DECREED: That for the reasons stated in the Court's Memorandum Opinion and Order dated January 20 2021, For the reasons stated in the Memorandum Opinion and Order, the Court dismisses Plaintiff's Complaint. While "[d]istrict courts should frequently provide leave to amend before dismissing a pro se complaint . . . leave to amend is not necessary when it would be futile." Reed v. Friedman Mgt. Corp., 541 F. App'x 40, 41 (2d Cir. 2013) (citing Cuoco v. Moritsugu, 222 F.3d 99, 112 (2d Cir. 2000)). Here, any amendment would be futile as Plaintiff cannot establish that his medical conditions implicate the protections of the Fourteenth Amendment; accordingly, this action is case is closed. Dated: New York, New York

January 21, 2021

RUBY J. KRAJICK

Clerk of Court

BY: /s/ _________

Deputy Clerk


Summaries of

Schmiege v. Deputy of Health Henton

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK
Jan 21, 2021
19 CIVIL 7229 (PMH) (S.D.N.Y. Jan. 21, 2021)
Case details for

Schmiege v. Deputy of Health Henton

Case Details

Full title:BRIAN E. SCHMIEGE, Plaintiff, v. DEPUTY OF HEALTH HENTON and DR. ALAM…

Court:UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK

Date published: Jan 21, 2021

Citations

19 CIVIL 7229 (PMH) (S.D.N.Y. Jan. 21, 2021)