Staine v. Sullivan et al, No. 9:2012cv00545 - Document 53 (N.D.N.Y 2014)

Court Description: DECISION and ORDER: This action, brought pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983, was referred to this Court by the Honorable Randolph F. Treece, United States Magistrate Judge, for a Report and Recommendation pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b) and Lo cal Rule 72.3(c). In the 52 Report-Recommendation, Magistrate Judge Treece recommends that Plaintiff's Motion for Summary Judgment be denied and Defendants' Cross-Motion for Summary Judgment be granted. No objections to the Report-Recomme ndation dated January 16, 2014 have been filed. After examining the record, this Court has determined that the Report- Recommendation is not subject to attack for plain error or manifest injustice. Accordingly, this Court adopts the Report-Recomm endation for the reasons stated therein. For the foregoing reasons, the Court AFFIRMS and ADOPTS the Report and Recommendation and DENIES Plaintiffs 34 Motion for Summary Judgment and GRANTS Defendants' 44 Cross-Motion for Summary Judgment. Signed by Senior Judge Thomas J. McAvoy on 3/19/2014. (ptm) (Copy served on plaintiff by regular mail)

Download PDF
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK ________________________________________ Eric Staine, Plaintiff, v. 9:12-CV-545 Patrick Sullivan et al., Defendants. ________________________________________ THOMAS J. McAVOY Senior United States District Judge DECISION and ORDER This action, brought pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983, was referred to this Court by the Honorable Randolph F. Treece, United States Magistrate Judge, for a Report and Recommendation pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b) and Local Rule 72.3(c). In the Report-Recommendation, Magistrate Judge Treece recommends that Plaintiff s Motion for Summary Judgment be denied and Defendants Cross-Motion for Summary Judgment be granted. No objections to the Report-Recommendation dated January 16, 2014 have been filed. After examining the record, this Court has determined that the Report- Recommendation is not subject to attack for plain error or manifest injustice. Accordingly, this Court adopts the Report-Recommendation for the reasons stated therein. For the foregoing reasons, the Court AFFIRMS and ADOPTS the Report and Recommendation and DENIES Plaintiff s Motion for Summary Judgment and GRANTS Defendants Cross-Motion for Summary Judgment. IT IS SO ORDERED. Dated: March 19, 2014

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.