Rosenberg v. City of New York

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK RUDY ROSENBERG; JACQUELINE ROSENBERG; ELTHA JORDAN, Plaintiffs, -against- JOHN ALLEN, BERNARDO AVILES, DERICK J. BENTLEY, WILLIAM BRATTON, JASON BROCHHAUSEN, DENNIS CALASCIBETTA, CITY OF NEW YORK, CARLOS M. GOMEZ, JANE AND JOHN DOES, JOHN AND JANE DOES 1- 20-CV-4012 (CM) 30, KALAWSKI, SERGEANT KIM, ROBERT KSELMAN, FREDERICK ORDER OF DISMISSAL LOEFFLER, MICHAEL MAGLIANO, DANIEL F. MAGRINO, JEWEL MCCOLLIN, HOWARD METZDORFF, TERRENCE A. MONAHAN, DAVID O'KEEFE, JAMES P. O'NEIL, EUGENE PORCARO, ROBERT RYAN, BONNIE SARD, NITIN SAVUR, MICHAEL SENSESE, DERMONT F. SHEA, CYRUS R. VANCE, JR, KATHLEEN WALSH, JAMES WHITEHEAD, Defendants.

COLLEEN McMAHON, Chief United States District Judge: Plaintiffs, appearing pro se, bring this action asserting claims arising out of various alleged conspiracies related to Plaintiff Rudy Rosenberg’s eviction and arrests. The Court dismisses the complaint for the following reasons.

Plaintiffs recently submitted to this Court a substantially similar complaint against many of the same Defendants arising out of the same events. That case is presently pending before me under docket number ECF 1:20-CV-3911 (CM). As this complaint raises the same claims against many of the same Defendants, no useful purpose would be served by litigating this duplicate lawsuit.! Therefore, this complaint is dismissed without prejudice to Plaintiff’s pending case under docket number ECF 1:20-CV-3911 (CM).

The Clerk of Court is directed to mail a copy of this order to Plaintiffs and note service on the docket.

Plaintiffs’ complaint is dismissed without prejudice as duplicative. Any outstanding motions are terminated. The Court certifies, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3), that any appeal from this order would not be taken in good faith and therefore in forma pauperis status is denied for the purpose of an appeal. See Coppedge v. United States, 369 U.S. 438, 444-45 (1962).

SO ORDERED.

Dated: May 28, 2020 New York, New York hie. Iu yk COLLEEN McMAHON Chief United States District Judge ' The Court issued an order in that matter directing each Plaintiff, among other things, to submit an in forma pauperis application. Claims arising out of the same events should be included in a single suit, and thus if Plaintiffs seek to add or modify claims or defendants in their complaint in 20-CV-3911 (CM), their remedy is to amend that complaint, consistent with Rule of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.