Henderson v. Fischer et al, No. 9:2012cv01704 - Document 60 (N.D.N.Y 2015)
Court Description: DECISION AND ORDER: ORDERED that 56 Report and Recommendation is accepted and adopted in its entirety. ORDERED that 47 Motion for Summary Judgment is granted in its entirety, and all claims against Defendants in this individual capacities ar e DISMISSED; and Plaintiff's §1983 claims for money damages against Defendants in their official capacities are sua sponte DISMISSED with prejudice. The Clerk may enter judgment in favor of defendants and close the file in this matter. Signed by Senior Judge Thomas J. McAvoy on 3/18/15.{order served via regular mail on plaintiff} (nas)
Download PDF
<![CDATA[
Henderson v. Fischer et al Doc. 60 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK MICHAEL JOSHUA HENDERSON, Plaintiff, 9:12-CV-01704 v. (TJM/TWD) BRIAN FISCHER, et al., Defendants. THOMAS J. MCAVOY, Senior United States District Judge DECISION & ORDER I. INTRODUCTION This pro se action brought pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 was referred by this Court to the Hon. Thérèse Wiley-Dancks, United States Magistrate Judge, for a Report and Recommendation pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b) and Local Rule 72.3(c). In her Order and Report-Recommendation, Magistrate Judge Wiley-Dancks recommended that Defendants’ motion for summary judgment (Dkt. # 47) be granted in its entirety; and that Plaintiff’s § 1983 claims for money damages against Defendants in their official capacities be sua sponte dismissed with prejudice. See Order & Rep.-Rec. Dkt. # 56. Plaintiff filed objections to Magistrate Judge Wiley-Dancks’ recommendations. See Dkt. No. 58. II. STANDARD OF REVIEW When objections to a magistrate judge’s report and recommendation are lodged, 1 Dockets.Justia.com the district court makes a “de novo determination of those portions of the report or specified proposed findings or recommendations to which objection is made.” See 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1); see also United States v. Male Juvenile, 121 F.3d 34, 38 (2d Cir. 1997) (The Court must make a de novo determination to the extent that a party makes specific objections to a magistrate’s findings.). III. DISCUSSION Having considered Plaintiff’s objections and having completed a de novo review of the issues raised by the objections, the Court accepts and adopts Magistrate Judge Wiley-Dancks’ recommendations for the reasons stated in her thorough report. IV. CONCLUSION For the reasons discussed above, the Court accepts and adopts Magistrate Judge Wiley-Dancks’ Order and Report-Recommendation in its entirety. Accordingly, Defendants’ motion for summary judgment (Dkt. # 47) is GRANTED in its entirety, and all claims against Defendants in this individual capacities are DISMISSED; and Plaintiff’s §1983 claims for money damages against Defendants in their official capacities are sua sponte DISMISSED with prejudice. The Clerk may enter judgment in favor of defendants and close the file in this matter. IT IS SO ORDERED. Dated: March 18, 2015 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.
