Magdalenski v. United States Government
District Court, D. Massachusetts
1Opinion of the Court
POSNOR, District Judge.
Upon de novo review, this Report and Recommendation is hereby adopted and defendant’s motion is ALLOWED. Despite counsel’s vigorous arguments, it is clear that the complaint is untimely. The clerk will enter judgment for defendant. So ordered.
REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION WITH REGARD TO DEFENDANT’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT (Docket No. 10)
August 18, 1997
NEIMAN, United States Magistrate Judge.
I.INTRODUCTION
Pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 56(b), the United States Government (“Defendant”) has moved for summary judgment on the complaint of James Magdalenski (“Plaintiff’),…
2Cases cited31 opinions
- Thomas v. ArnSupreme Court of the United States · 1986
- Irwin v. Department of Veterans AffairsSupreme Court of the United States · 1991
- United States v. KubrickSupreme Court of the United States · 1979
- Heckler v. Community Health Services of Crawford County, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1984
- United States v. Emiliano Valencia-CopeteCourt of Appeals for the First Circuit · 1986
26 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by4 opinions
- Schock v. United StatesDistrict Court, D. Rhode Island · 1998
- DO NOT DOCKET IN THIS MEMBER CASE- LEAD CASE IS NOW CIVIL NO. 24-1290 (MAJ).District Court, D. Puerto Rico · 2025
- Magdalenski v. PrincipiCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 2003
- Nibbs v. United States Coast GuardDistrict Court, D. Puerto Rico · 2025