Text
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SECOND CIRCUIT SUMMARY ORDER THIS SUMMARY ORDER WILL NOT BE PUBLISHED IN THE FEDERAL REPORTER AND MAY NOT BE CITED AS PRECEDENTIAL AUTHORITY TO THIS OR ANY OTHER COURT, BUT MAY BE CALLED TO THE ATTENTION OF THIS OR ANY OTHER COURT IN A SUBSEQUENT STAGE OF THIS CASE, IN A RELATED CASE, OR IN ANY CASE FOR PURPOSES OF COLLATERAL ESTOPPEL OR RES JUDICATA.
At a stated term of the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit, held at the United States Courthouse, Foley Square, in the City of New York, on the 20th day of May, Two Thousand and Two.
PRESENT: HONORABLE Fred I. Parker, HONORABLE Chester J. Straub, HONORABLE Sonia Sotomayor, Circuit Judges.
ROBERT M. LUSTBERG, Plaintiff-Appellant, HENRY L. ROGERS & M. JOHN HOSLEY, JR., Consolidated-Plaintiffs-Appellants, v. No. 01-7254
CHRISTINE S. SNIDE, Consolidated-Defendant-Appellee, JAMES T. CURRY & HAMILTON COUNTY, Defendants-Appellees.
APPEARING FOR APPELLANTS: Mona C. Engel Law Offices of Robert F. Danzi Westbury, New York APPEARING FOR APPELLEES HAMILTON COUNTY &
CHRISTINE S. SNIDE: Jeannine A. Broomhall Warren, Connecticut APPEARING FOR APPELLEE JAMES T. CURRY: Alan J. Pierce, Esq.
Hancock & Estabrook, LLP Syracuse, New York Lustberg v. Curry Docket No. 01-7254
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of New York (Frederick J. Scullin, Jr., Chief Judge).
UPON DUE CONSIDERATION, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED, ADJUDGED AND DECREED that the decision of said district court be and it hereby is AFFIRMED.
Plaintiffs-appellants Robert M. Lustberg, Henry L. Rogers, and M. John Hosley, Jr., appeal from a February 5, 2001 Memorandum-Decision and Order of the United States District Court for the Northern District of New York (Frederick J. Scullin, Jr., Chief Judge), granting the motions for judgment on the pleadings pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(c) submitted by defendants-appellees James T. Curry, Hamilton County, and Christine S. Snide.
Plaintiffs contend that the district court erred in holding that Curry was protected by absolute immunity, that Curry and Snide were also protected by qualified immunity, and that Hamilton County had no municipal liability.
We affirm for substantially the same reasons set forth in the district court's Memorandum-Decision and Order.
For the reasons set forth above, the judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED.
FOR THE COURT, Roseann B. MacKechnie, Clerk By: __
Lucille Carr, Operations Manager
Sponsored links