DePonceau v. Pataki
District Court, W.D. New York
1Opinion of the Court
DECISION AND ORDER
LARIMER, District Judge.
INTRODUCTION
Plaintiffs have filed this pro se action seeking relief under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (Docket No. 1) and have paid the filing fee. For the reasons discussed below, the complaint is dismissed with prejudice.
DISCUSSION
A. The Complaint
In evaluating the complaint, the Court must accept as true all factual allegations and must draw all inferences in plaintiffs favor. See King v. Simpson, 189 F.3d 284, 287 (2d Cir.1999). Dismissal is not appropriate “unless it appears beyond doubt that the plaintiff can prove no set of facts in support of his claim…
2Cases cited34 opinions
- Conley v. GibsonSupreme Court of the United States · 1957
- Lujan v. Defenders of WildlifeSupreme Court of the United States · 1992
- Warth v. SeldinSupreme Court of the United States · 1975
- District of Columbia Court of Appeals v. FeldmanSupreme Court of the United States · 1983
- Rooker v. Fidelity Trust Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1924
29 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by24 opinions
- Adonys Giovanni Garcia Mesias v. Merrick B. Garland, et al.District Court, E.D. Virginia · 2026
- Allen v. ILA Local 1414District Court, S.D. Georgia · 2021
- Brown v. BobbettDistrict Court, W.D. Tennessee · 2021
- Christensen v. FCI Forrest City LowDistrict Court, E.D. Arkansas · 2025
- Daniels v. Verizon WirelessDistrict Court, N.D. California · 2025
19 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.