Legal Opinion
Golodner v. City of New London
Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit
Decided October 27, 2011No. 10-3964-cvUnpublishedCited by 5 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
SUMMARY ORDER
Plaintiff Daniel Golodner (“Golodner”) appeals from the grant of summary judgment pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 56. Golod-ner contends principally that the District Court erred in its ruling that he failed to raise a genuine issue of material fact as to his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 claims against Defendants Todd Bergeson, Genaro Velez, Patricia Tidd, Deanna Nott, Margaret Ackley, and Officer Garnett (the “Individual Defendants”), and that the grant of summary judgment to all the Individual Defendants precluded liability of the City of New London. We presume the parties’ familiarity with the…
2Cases cited12 opinions
- Engquist v. Oregon Department of AgricultureSupreme Court of the United States · 2008
- Miller v. Wolpoff & Abramson, L.L.P.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 2003
- Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. v. Visa U.S.A. Inc.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 2005
- Sylvia Panetta v. Thomas M. Crowley, Marc Jurnove, Patricia A. Kelvasa, John Doe I, Docket No. 02-7275-CvCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 2006
- Clubside, Inc. v. ValentinCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 2006
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by5 opinions
- Golodner v. BerlinerCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 2014
- Burgess v. City of New YorkDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 2025
- Cook v. State of ConnecticutDistrict Court, D. Connecticut · 2025
- Hernaiz v. CarlsonDistrict Court, D. Connecticut · 2024
- Small v. New York City Department of CorrectionDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 2022