Sheils v. Flynn et al, No. 9:2006cv00407 - Document 64 (N.D.N.Y 2009)
Court Description: DECISION and ORDER accepting and adopting the 61 Report-Recommendations. ORDERED that, Defendants' motion for summary judgment is GRANTED; Plaintiff's cross-motion for summary judgment is DENIED; The claims against defendant Otis are DISMISSED; The complaint is DISMISSED in its entirety.Signed by Judge David N. Hurd on 9/2/2009. {Decision & Order served on plaintiff via regular mail} (mgh)
Download PDF
<![CDATA[
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK ----------------------------------KEVIN SHEILS, Plaintiff, 9:06-CV-407 vs T. FLYNN, B. LeCUYER, and T. SEAMEN, Each Nurse Administrator; CAHILL, CHAMPAGNE, WHALEN, and LEE, Each Primary Care Physician; OTIS and RYAN, Each Registered Nurse, Defendants. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ APPEARANCES: OF COUNSEL: KEVIN SHEILS Plaintiff, pro se 99-A-5444 Elmira Correctional Facility Box 500 Elmira, NY 14902 HON. ANDREW M. CUOMO Attorney General of the State of New York Attorney for State Defendants Department of Law The Capitol Albany, New York 12224 HEATHER R. RUBINSTEIN, ESQ. SENTA B. SIUDA, ESQ. Assts. Attorney General DAVID N. HURD United States District Judge DECISION and ORDER Plaintiff, Kevin Sheils, brought this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. ยง 1983. By Report-Recommendation dated May 27, 2009, the Honorable George H. Lowe, United States Magistrate Judge, recommended that defendants motion for summary judgment (Docket No. 50) be granted and that plaintiff s cross motion for summary judgment (Docket No. 53) be denied, and that all claims against defendant Otis be dismissed pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 4(m). The plaintiff has timely filed lengthy objections to the reportrecommendation. Based upon a careful review of the entire file and the recommendations of Magistrate Judge Lowe, the Report-Recommendation is accepted and adopted in all respects. See 28 U.S.C. 636(b)(1). Accordingly, it is ORDERED that 1. Defendants motion for summary judgment is GRANTED; 2. Plaintiff s cross-motion for summary judgment is DENIED; 3. The claims against defendant Otis are DISMISSED; 4. The complaint is DISMISSED in its entirety; and 4. The Clerk is directed to enter judgment accordingly and close the file. IT IS SO ORDERED. Dated: September 2, 2009 Utica, New York. - 2 -
]]>
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You
should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google
Privacy Policy and
Terms of Service apply.
