Cox v. The City of New Rochelle
- Philip Halpern
- 7:17-cv-08193
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 2
In Cox v. New Rochelle, Judge Halpern granted defendants’ motions, denied further amendment, dismissed Cox’s claims with prejudice, and closed the case.
Robert Cox’s claims against the City of New Rochelle and the other defendants, including the unserved defendants, were dismissed with prejudice.
What happened
In Cox v. The City of New Rochelle, Robert Cox sued the City and other defendants. The judgment refers to an earlier memorandum opinion and order and states that Cox’s Section 1983 claims were time-barred and that his conspiracy claim’s pleading problems had not been fixed despite multiple chances to amend.
The court granted the defendants’ motions. It denied Cox permission to file a Third Amended Complaint because any amendment would be futile. The court also dismissed Cox’s claims against the unserved defendants and dismissed the claims with prejudice, meaning they could not be brought again in this case.
Judge Philip Halpern’s court closed the case after entering the judgment. The judgment is dated September 30, 2020.
The detailed version
- Cox v. The City of New Rochelle · No. 7:17-cv-08193
- Philip Halpern
- Sept. 30, 2020
Background
Robert Cox brought claims against the City of New Rochelle and other defendants. The judgment states that the court was acting for the reasons given in a memorandum opinion and order dated September 28, 2020. It identifies Cox’s claims under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 as time-barred. It also states that Cox had already received multiple opportunities to amend his pleading, including his conspiracy claim, but had not corrected the identified pleading deficiencies.
Rulings
The court granted the defendants’ motions. It denied Cox leave to file a Third Amended Complaint because amendment would be futile. As to defendants who had not been served, the court stated that dismissal with prejudice was appropriate because the same grounds supporting dismissal of the served defendants also supported dismissal as to the unserved defendants. The court dismissed Cox’s claims with prejudice and closed the case.
Effect
The judgment ended the case and barred Cox from repleading the dismissed claims in this action. Judge Philip Halpern is identified in the supplied case information; the excerpt itself displays a clerk’s signature rather than the judge’s signature.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.