Froiseth v. City Of New York
Froiseth v. City Of New York
Trial Court Opinion
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK
STEFANIE FROISETH, Plaintiff, v.
No. 24-CV-747 (RA) THE CITY OF NEW YORK, NEW YORK CITY DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTION, ORDER CORRECTION OFFICERS (1-10) OF THE NEW YORK CITY DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTION, and PHYSICIAN AFFILIATE GROUP OF NEW YORK, P.C., Defendants.
RONNIE ABRAMS, United States District Judge: On February 1, 2024, Defendants removed this action from the Supreme Court of the State of New York, Bronx County, to this Court on the basis of federal question jurisdiction. See Dkt. No. 1. On February 12, 2024, pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(a)(1), Plaintiff voluntary dismissed her fifth cause of action, which had alleged Monell violations under
42 U.S.C. § 1983. See Monell v. Dep’t of Soc. Servs. of City of New York,
436 U.S. 658(1978); Dkt. No. 9. Plaintiff no longer appears to assert any federal claims. On February 13, 2024, the parties submitted a joint letter to the Court to “respectfully request that the Court issue an order remanding this matter back to the Supreme Court of the State of New York, Bronx County” and noting that the parties “duly met and conferred and consent to such request.” Dkt. No. 10. In light of the agreement between the parties, the motion to remand is granted. See Goldfarb v. New York & Prebyterian Hosp., No. 17-CV-3513,
2017 WL 3835243, at *1 (E.D.N.Y. Sept. 1, 2017) (noting that remand “is indisputably appropriate” where a plaintiff “eliminated her federal claims ... and all parties consent to remand.”). The Clerk is respectfully directed to remand this case and to close the docket. SO ORDERED. Dated: February 15, 2024 . / New York, New York J\% ( ———__ Hon. Ronnie Abrams United States District Judge
Reference
- Status
- Unknown