green
Positive treatment
Quoted verbatim 1×
6.8 score
“because plaintiff has now been transferred to another facility, we dismiss his claim for injunctive relief as moot.”
Treatment trajectory · 1992 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
1992
2009
2026
Top citers, strongest first. 19 distinct citers.
How cited ↗
discussed
Cited as authority (quoted)
Baltas v. Chapdelaine
because plaintiff has now been transferred to another facility, we dismiss his claim for injunctive relief as moot.
discussed
Cited "see"
Pugh v. Casimir
See Aziz Zarif Shabazz v. Pico, 994 F. Supp. 460 , 469–70 (S.D.N.Y. 1998) (granting summary judgment where medical records contained no indication of the injuries plaintiff claimed, and “Plaintiff offers no reasonable basis for disbelieving his medical records, but only asserts that his medical records are inaccurate”) (citing Candelaria v. Coughlin, 787 F. Supp. 368, 374 (S.D.N.Y.), aff’d, 979 F.2d 845 (2d Cir. 1992)).
discussed
Cited "see"
Mina Investment Holdings Ltd. v. Lefkowitz
See Farkas v. Ellis, 783 F.Supp. 830, 833 (S.D.N.Y.), aff'd, 979 F.2d 845 (2d Cir.1992); see also Lehmuller, 982 F.Supp. at 135 (noting that “courts have reiterated that Rule 6.3 motion is not a motion to reargue those issues already considered when a party does not like the way the original motion was resolved”).
discussed
Cited "see"
In Re Hagerstown Fiber Ltd. Partnership
Group v. CalFed, Inc., 940 F.Supp. 554, 557 (S.D.N.Y.1996)(quoting Morser v. AT & T Information Sys., 715 F.Supp. 516, 517 (S.D.N.Y.1989)); accord Farkas v. Ellis, 783 F.Supp. 830, 832-33 (S.D.N.Y.), aff'd 979 F.2d 845 (2d Cir.1992).
discussed
Cited "see"
Ramirez v. Brooklyn Aids Task Force
See Darvoe v. Town of Trenton, 785 F.Supp. 305, 311 (N.D.N.Y.) (dismissing for failure to state a claim under Rule 12(b)(6) because claim was not cognizable), ajfd, 979 F.2d 845 (2d Cir. 1992); Wise v. Battistoni No. 92-CV-4288, 1992 WL 380914 , at *2 (S.D.N.Y.
discussed
Cited "see"
Allendale Mutual Ins. Co. v. Excess Ins. Co., Ltd.
See Farkas v. Ellis, 783 F.Supp. 830, 832 (S.D.N.Y.) (“The standard for granting a motion for reargument is strict in order to preclude repetitive arguments on issues that have already been considered fully by the court.”), aff'd, 979 F.2d 845 (2d Cir.1992). “[T]he court must not allow a party to use the motion to reargue as a substitute for appealing from a final judgment.” Fulani v. Brady, 149 F.R.D. 501, 503 (S.D.N.Y.1993), aff'd, 35 F.3d 49 (2d Cir.1994).
discussed
Cited "see"
Show v. Patterson
See Candelaria v. Coughlin, 787 F.Supp. 368, 374-75 (S.D.N.Y.) (where officer allegedly pushed his fist against inmate’s neck so inmate could not move or breathe, court found only de minimis use of force since officer did not use force repeatedly and no bruises or swelling resulted), af f'd, 979 F.2d 845 (2d Cir.1992).
discussed
Cited "see"
Clarence Duke McGann v. State of New York, Connie Mann, Correspondence Supervisor and Correspondence Room Personnel
See Darvoe v. Town of Trenton, 785 F.Supp. 305 , 308 n. 2 (N.D.N.Y.) (“New York courts require strict compliance with the provisions of the C.P.L.R. to perfect service.”), aff'd, 979 F.2d 845 (2d Cir. 1992).
cited
Cited "see"
Mancuso v. Consolidated Edison Co. of New York
See Farkas v. Ellis, 783 F.Supp. 830, 832 (S.D.N.Y.), aff'd, 979 F.2d 845 (2d Cir.1992).
cited
Cited "see"
Zamakshari v. Dvoskin
See Candelaria v. Coughlin, 787 F.Supp. 368, 373 (S.D.N.Y.1992), aff'd, 979 F.2d 845 (2d Cir.1992); Garrido v. Coughlin, 716 F.Supp. 98, 100 (S.D.N.Y.1989).
cited
Cited "see"
United States v. BCCI Holdings (Luxembourg), S.A.
See In re Smouha, 136 B.R. 921, 928 (S.D.N.Y.), appeal dismissed, 979 F.2d 845 (2d Cir.1992).
cited
Cited "see"
United States v. Bcci Holdings (Luxembourg), S.A., Bank of Credit and Commerce International, S.A., Bank of Credit and Commerce International (Overseas) Limited, and International Credit and Investment Company (Overseas) Limited, Shrichand Chawla, Leo D. Curran, Willy Hermans, and Red Circle Investment, Ltd., Jaleh Khorassanchy, Amit Pandya, Soha, Inc., Idriss Devco, Inc., and S & L Gentrade, Inc., Claimants-Appellants. United States of America v. Bcci Holdings (Luxembourg), S.A., Bank of Credit and Commerce International, S.A., Bank of Credit and Commerce International (Overseas) Limited, and International Credit and Investment Company (Overseas) Limited, Raymond Davies, as Conservator for the Branch in Sierra Leone of Bank of Credit and Commerce International (Overseas) Limited, Claimant-Appellant
See In re Smouha, 136 B.R. 921, 928 (S.D.N.Y.), appeal dismissed, 979 F.2d 845 (2d Cir.1992).
discussed
Cited "see"
United States v. McCombs-Ellison
See Farkas v. Ellis, 783 F.Supp. 830, 832 (S.D.N.Y.1992), aff'd 979 F.2d 845 (2d Cir.1992) (“plaintiffs motion to alter or amend the judgment[ ] [is] essentially a motion for reargument [arid] will be considered under Rule 59(e)”).
cited
Cited "see, e.g."
Dobbin v. Artuz
See, e.g., Candelaria v. Coughlin, 787 F.Supp. 368, 372 (S.D.N.Y.1992), aff'd, 979 F.2d 845 (2d Cir.1992).
cited
Cited "see, e.g."
Aziz Zarif Shabazz v. Pico
Plaintiffs Opposition # 1, at 9 ¶ 14; see also Candelaria v. Coughlin, 787 F.Supp. 368, 374 (S.D.N.Y.), aff'd, 979 F.2d 845 (2d Cir.1992).
cited
Cited "see, e.g."
In Re Jamesway Corp.
See In re Houbigant, Inc., 190 B.R. 185, 187 (Bankr.S.D.N.Y.1995); see, e.g., Farkas v. Ellis, 783 F.Supp. 830 , 833 n. 1 (S.D.N.Y.), aff'd, 979 F.2d 845 (2d Cir.1992); Travelers Insur.
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
New York City Department of Finance v. Twin Rivers, Inc.
See, e.g., Farkas v. Ellis, 783 F.Supp. 830, 832 (S.D.N.Y.), aff'd, 979 F.2d 845 (2d Cir.1992) (strict standard to grant reargument to avoid reconsideration of issues already considered); Mancuso v. Consolidated Edison Co. of New York, Inc., 905 F.Supp. 1251, 1255 (S.D.N.Y.1995) (“moving party must demonstrate ... court overlooked controlling decisions or factual matters”) (citing Violette v. Armonk Assocs., 823 F.Supp. 224, 226 (S.D.N.Y.1993)).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Allied Semi-Conductors International, Ltd. v. Pulsar Components International, Inc.
Id. at 40 ; see also Darvoe v. Town of Trenton, 785 F.Supp. 305, 308 (N.D.N.Y.), aff'd, 979 F.2d 845 (2d Cir.1992); Lee v. Carlson, 645 F.Supp. 1430, 1432 (S.D.N.Y.1986), aff'd, 812 F.2d 712 (2d Cir.1987).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Woodard v. Hardenfelder
See also Farkas v. Ellis, 783 F.Supp. 830, 832 (S.D.N.Y.) (“The standard for granting a motion for reargument is strict in order to preclude repetitive arguments on issues that have already been considered fully by the court.”), aff'd, 979 F.2d 845 (2d Cir. 1992).
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
In Re Smouha
92-5006.
Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit.
Oct 19, 1992.
Published
Citer courts: D. Connecticut (1)
In re Smouha
NO. 92-5006
United States Court of Appeals,
Second Circuit.
Oct 19, 1992
Appeal From: S.D.N.Y., 136
B.R. 921
1
DISMISSED.