Hernandez v. City of Rochester
Hernandez v. City of Rochester
Opinion of the Court
SUMMARY ORDER
Pro se Plaintiffs-Appellants Myrtha and Hiram Hernandez appeal from the judgment of the United States District Court for the Western District of New York (Larimer, J.) entered pursuant to a Decision and Order dated July 11, 2002, granting defendants’ motion for summary judgment and dismissing plaintiffs’ second amended complaint.
This Court reviews orders granting summary judgment de novo and focuses on whether the district court properly concluded that there was no genuine issue as to any material fact and the moving party was entitled to summary judgment as a matter of law. See Allstate Ins. Co. v. Mazzola, 175 F.3d 255, 258 (2d Cir. 1999).
For the reasons stated in the district court’s thorough opinion, we affirm. The judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED.
Reference
- Full Case Name
- Myrtha HERNANDEZ and Hiram Hernandez v. THE CITY OF ROCHESTER, Van White, Appointed Special Counsel to Mayor for Crime and Violence, Raymond Littlefield, Administrator of Code Compliance, Robert Grana, Jon Remmel, Peter Saxe, All Inspectors for the Dept. of Community Development of the City of Rochester, E. Weaver, Police Sergeant for Goodman Section Police Station and Terrance Borshorff, Director of the Bureau of Property Conservation, all in their official and individual capacities, William Johnson, as Mayor of the City of Rochester, Robert Warshaw, Chief of Police for the City of Rochester and Unknown Officers, Patrol Cars 236, 246, 126 and 256 of the Goodman Section Police Station
- Status
- Published