Case ID: f-appx_377/html/0117-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Diemiruaya Ogheneakpor DENIRAN, Michael E. Noak Jr., Shatina Unique Freeman, Juliet N. Small, Appellants, v. John B. MATTINGLY, Commissioner of New York City’s Administration for Children’s Services, Michael R. Bloomberg, Mayor of the City of New York, Raymond W. Kelly, Commissioner of the New York City Police Department, Michael A. Cardozo, Corporation Counsel of the City of New York, Chelsea Cofer, Child Protective Specialist New York City Child Services, Clyde Clark, Child Protective Manager New York City Child Services, Sgt. Murphy, New York City Police Department, Detective Tosi, New York City Police Department, Tiffany Goldberg, Social Worker, Woodhull Medical & Mental Health Center, Park Slope Christian Help, Sarah Harbutt, Park Slope Christian Help, Olivette Casey, Appellees.
    
    
      No. 09-2118-cv.
    United States Court of Appeals, Second Circuit.
    May 18, 2010.
    Diemiruaya Ogheneakpor Deniran, Michael E. Noak Jr., Shatina Unique Freeman, Juliet N. Small, pro se, New York, NY.
    James L. Franklin, New York, NY, for Appellee Casey.
    Karen M. Griffin, New York City Law Department, New York, NY, for City Ap-pellees.
    PRESENT: AMALYA L. KEARSE, RICHARD C. WESLEY, Circuit Judges, PAUL A. CROTTY, District Judge.
    
    
      
       The Clerk of the Court is respectfully directed to amend the official caption as set forth above.
    
    
      
       The Honorable Paul A. Crotty, of the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York, sitting by designation.
    
   SUMMARY ORDER

Appellants appeal from the March 31, 2009 judgment of the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York, dismissing their complaint. Appellants’ complaint, brought pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983, alleged violations of their constitutional rights, stemming from an investigation by the New York City Administration for Children’s Services. We assume the parties’ familiarity with the underlying facts, the procedural history, and the issues presented for review. We affirm for all of the reasons stated in the thorough and well-reasoned opinion of the district court.

We have considered all of appellants’ arguments on appeal and find them to be without merit. Accordingly, the judgment of the district court is hereby AFFIRMED.