From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Smith v. Maypes-Rhynders

United States District Court, S.D. New York
Apr 1, 2009
07 Civ. 11241 (PAC) (MHD) (S.D.N.Y. Apr. 1, 2009)

Summary

finding allegation that but for the defendants' confiscation of important legal documents, the plaintiff would have prevailed in a state court lawsuit sufficient to state a claim

Summary of this case from Hammock v. Pierce

Opinion

07 Civ. 11241 (PAC) (MHD).

April 1, 2009


ORDER


Judge Paul A. Crotty having granted defendants' motion to dismiss in part and denied it in part, it is hereby ORDERED that defendants are to serve and file an answer to plaintiff's complaint by no later than April 20, 2009.


Summaries of

Smith v. Maypes-Rhynders

United States District Court, S.D. New York
Apr 1, 2009
07 Civ. 11241 (PAC) (MHD) (S.D.N.Y. Apr. 1, 2009)

finding allegation that but for the defendants' confiscation of important legal documents, the plaintiff would have prevailed in a state court lawsuit sufficient to state a claim

Summary of this case from Hammock v. Pierce
Case details for

Smith v. Maypes-Rhynders

Case Details

Full title:JULIO ISLEY SMITH, Plaintiff, v. JANET MAYPES-RHYNDERS et al., Defendants

Court:United States District Court, S.D. New York

Date published: Apr 1, 2009

Citations

07 Civ. 11241 (PAC) (MHD) (S.D.N.Y. Apr. 1, 2009)

Citing Cases

Williams v. The City of New York

(quoting Davis, 320 F.3d at 353.). A plaintiff can demonstrate that retaliatory conduct meets that standard…

Sitts v. Simonds

A claimant can meet the second element by demonstrating that he was subject to “retaliatory conduct that…