Cuadrado v. State of New York et al, No. 9:2014cv01293 - Document 21 (N.D.N.Y 2015)

Court Description: DECISION AND ORDER: ORDERED that 19 Report and Recommendation is accepted and adopted in all respects. ORDERED that 13 Defendant Brueault's motion to dismiss is GRANTED; to the extent plaintiff asserts claims against defendant Bruea ult in his official capacity, those claims are DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE. All remaining claims are DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE based on plaintiff's failure to fully exhaust administrative remedies. The Central Office Review Committee (" ;CORC") is directed to render a decision on plaintiff's pending grievance within thirty days of the date of this Decision and Order, that is, by May 8, 2015; If plaintiff does not receive a decision from the CORC by May 8, 2015, admin istrative remedies may be deemed unavailable to him and he may therefore be excused from exhausting; In the event plaintiff does not receive a decision from the CORC by May 8, 2015, he may refile this suit indicating such. In the event plaintiff does receive a decision from the CORC by May 8, 2015, he may refile this suit indicating such. Signed by Judge David N. Hurd on 4/8/15. {order served via regular mail on plaintiff}(nas)

Download PDF
Cuadrado v. State of New York et al Doc. 21 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK DIMAS CUADRADO, Plaintiff, v. 9:14-CV-1293 (DNH/CFH) BRUEAULT, Correction Officer, Coxsackie Correctional Facility, Defendant. APPEARANCES: DIMAS CUADRADO 13-A-3993 Plaintiff, pro se Great Meadow Correctional Facility Box 51 Comstock, NY 12821 HON. ERIC T. SCHNEIDERMAN Attorney General for the State of New York Attorney for Defendant Litigation Bureau The Capitol Albany, NY 12224 RACHEL M. KISH, ESQ. Ass't Attorney General DAVID N. HURD United States District Judge DECISION and ORDER Pro se plaintiff Dimas Cuadrado brought this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. On March 17, 2015, the Honorable Christian F. Hum mel, United States Magistrate Judge, advised by Report-Recommendation that defendant's motion to dismiss pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6) be granted. Plaintiff timely filed objections to the Dockets.Justia.com Report-Recommendation. Based upon a de novo review of the portions of the Report-Recommendation to which plaintiff objected, the Report-Recommendation is accepted and adopted in all respects. See 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). Therefore, it is ORDERED that 1. Defendant Brueault's motion to dismiss is GRANTED; 2. To the extent plaintiff asserts claims against defendant Brueault in his official capacity, those claims are DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE; 3. All remaining claims are DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE based on plaintiff's failure to fully exhaust administrative remedies; 4. The Central Office Review Committee ("CORC") is directed to render a decision on plaintiff's pending grievance within thirty days of the date of this Decision and Order, that is, by May 8, 2015; 5. If plaintiff does not receive a decision from the CORC by May 8, 2015, administrative remedies may be deemed unavailable to him and he may therefore be excused from exhausting; 6. In the event plaintiff does not receive a decision from the CORC by May 8, 2015, he may refile this suit indicating such; 7. In the event plaintiff does receive a decision from the CORC by Mail 8, 2015, he may refile this suit indicating such; and 8. The Clerk is directed to serve a copy of this Decision and Order upon the parties in accordance with the Local Rules. 2 IT IS SO ORDERED. Dated: April 8, 2015 Utica, New York. 3

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.