Case ID: f-appx_394/html/0741-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Anthony ROLLS, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. PENNSYLVANIA HOTEL, Vornado Realty Trust, Billy Lye, Defendants-Appellees.
    No. 08-3054-cv.
    United States Court of Appeals, Second Circuit.
    Sept. 28, 2010.
    Anthony Rolls, pro se, Sonyea, N.Y.
    Ronald Kreismann, Frances M. Nicas-tro, Paul, Hastings, Janofsky & Walker LLP, New York, N.Y., for Appellees.
    PRESENT: GUIDO CALABRESI, ROBERT A. KATZMANN, DENNY CHIN, Circuit Judges.
   SUMMARY ORDER

Plaintiff-Appellant Anthony Rolls, pro se, appeals from the May 7, 2008 order of the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York (Berman, /.) granting Defendant-Appellee Pennsylvania Hotel’s motion for summary judgment. We assume the parties’ familiarity with the underlying facts and the procedural history of the case.

We review orders granting summary judgment de novo and focus 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 judgment as a matter of law. See Nat’l Council of La Raza v. Dep’t of Justice, 411 F.3d 350, 355 (2d Cir.2005); Miller v. Wolpoff & Abramson, L.L.P., 321 F.3d 292, 300 (2d Cir.2003). In determining whether there are genuine issues of material fact, we are “required to resolve all ambiguities and draw all permissible factual inferences in favor of the party against whom summary judgment is sought.” Terry v. Ashcroft, 336 F.3d 128, 137 (2d Cir.2003) (internal quotations omitted).

After having reviewed Rolls’s contentions on appeal and the record of proceedings below, we affirm for substantially the same reasons stated by the district court in its thorough opinion. We have considered all of Rolls’s arguments and find them to be without merit.

Accordingly, the judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED.