Case ID: f-appx_227/html/0098-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Alexander BREYTMAN, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. WIENER REALTORS, Rappaport, Hertz, Cherson & Rosenthal P.C., John Robalino, Jason Danisi, New York City Small Claims Court, Supreme Court Pro Se Office of Kings County, Judge Jane Doe of Small Claims Court of Kings County, Defendants-Appellees.
    No. 06-3405-cv.
    United States Court of Appeals, Second Circuit.
    July 11, 2007.
    Alexander Breytman, pro se, New York, N.Y.
    Mark P. Monack, Jaffe & Asher, LLP, New York, N.Y., for Defendant-Appellee Wiener Realtors.
    PRESENT: Hon. GUIDO CALABRESI, Hon. B.D. PARKER, and Hon. RICHARD C. WESLEY Circuit Judges.
   SUMMARY ORDER

Plaintiff-Appellant Alexander Breytman, proceeding pro se, appeals from the judgment of the United States District Court for the Eastern District of New York (Gershon, J.), denying Breytman’s motion for reconsideration, and dismissing, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B)(ii), his complaint in its entirety. We assume the parties’ familiarity with the procedural history, facts, and relevant issues on appeal.

For substantially the reasons stated in the district court’s June 1, 2006 and June 27, 2006 orders, we hold that Breytman’s motion for reconsideration was properly denied, and that his complaint was properly dismissed.

We have considered all of Plaintiff-Appellant’s arguments, and, like the district court, we have construed his pro se submissions liberally, see Triestman v. Fed. Bureau of Prisons, 470 F.3d 471, 474 (2d Cir.2006) (per curiam). Having done so, we find them to be without merit. Accordingly, the judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED.