Guarneri v. Goodreau et al, No. 1:2019cv00921 - Document 9 (N.D.N.Y 2019)
Court Description: DECISION AND ORDER that Chief Magistrate Judge Baxter's Report-Recommendation (Dkt. No. 7 ) is ACCEPTED and ADOPTED in its entirety. Plaintiff's second motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis (Dkt. No. 4 ) is DENIED. Pla intiff's Complaint (Dkt. No. 1 ) shall be DISMISSED without prejudice and without further Order of this Court UNLESS, within THIRTY (30) DAYS of the date of this Decision and Order, Plaintiff pays the Court's filing fee of four hundred d ollars ($400.00). Should Plaintiff comply with this Decision and Order, the Clerk shall return the file to Chief Magistrate Judge Baxter for his review of Plaintiff's Complaint in accordance with 28 U.S.C. § 1915(A). Signed by Chief Judge Glenn T. Suddaby on 11/15/2019. (Copy served upon plaintiff via regular mail). (sal )
Download PDF
<![CDATA[
Guarneri v. Goodreau et al Doc. 9 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK _______________________________________________ JOSEPH PAUL GUARNERI, Plaintiff, 1:19-CV-0921 (GTS/ATB) v. MELISSA GOODREAU, Social Worker, Schoharie Cty. Dep’t of Soc. Servs.; JULIA SAMMON, Schoharie Cty. Dep’t of Soc. Servs. Comm’n; ELSA LEABAURY, Physician, Albany Cty. Jail; RICH PETER, Albany Cty. Jail Inmate Serv.; MICHAEL J. LYONS, Superintendent, Albany Cty. Jail; CRAIG D. APPLE, SR., Sheriff, Albany Cty.; MARK GAYLORD, Schoharie Cty. Pub. Defender, MICHAEL L. BREEN, Assistant Dist. Attorney, Schoharie Cty.; LORA J. TRYON, Assistant Dist. Attorney, Schoharie Cty.; and SUSAN J. MALLERY, Dist. Attorney, Schoharie Cty., Defendants. _______________________________________________ APPEARANCES: JOSEPH PAUL GUARNERI, 14468-7665 Plaintiff, Pro Se Albany County Correctional Facility 840 Albany Shaker Road Albany, New York 12211 GLENN T. SUDDABY, Chief United States District Judge DECISION and ORDER Currently before the Court, in this pro se civil rights action filed by Joseph Paul Guarneri (“Plaintiff”) against the ten above-captioned employees of Schoharie and Albany (“Defendants”) pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983, are (1) Chief United States Magistrate Judge Andrew T. Baxter’s Report-Recommendation recommending that Plaintiff’s second motion for leave to proceed in Dockets.Justia.com forma pauperis be denied and that his Complaint be dismissed without prejudice unless, within thirty (30) days of the issuance of a Decision and Order adopting the Report-Recommendation, Plaintiff pays the statutory filing fee of four hundred dollars ($400.00), and (2) Plaintiff’s Objection to the Report-Recommendation. (Dkt. Nos. 7, 8.) For the sake of brevity, the Court will liberally construe Plaintiff’s Objection as setting forth specific challenges to all findings and recommendations in the Report-Recommendation. Even doing so, after carefully reviewing the relevant papers herein, the Court can find no error in Chief Magistrate Judge Baxter’s Report-Recommendation: Chief Magistrate Judge Baxter employed the proper standards, accurately recited the facts, and reasonably applied the law to those facts. As a result, the Report-Recommendation is accepted and adopted in its entirety for the reasons set forth therein. To those reasons, the Court would add only one point. In his Objections, dated August 21, 2019, Plaintiff argues essentially that he is exposed to “potential danger” because (1) an official in his correctional facility’s business office is refusing to certify the balance in his account at the facility, (2) he has received “repeated threat[s] [of] physical beat[ings]” at the facility, (3) he recently received a “coronary angiograph” and four stents, and (4) he is a diabetic. (Dkt. No. 8.) In addition, Plaintiff argues that there is a nexus between this potential danger and his legal claims asserted in his Complaint, which regard (among other things) his allegedly deficient medical care at the facility. (Id.) Even if the Court were to consider such late blossoming factual allegations (which it is not inclined to do, out of respect for the judicial efficiency and the Federal Magistrates Act of 1968), the Court would find that these arguments fail to plausibly suggest that Plaintiff was in imminent danger of serious physical injury at the time his Complaint was dated and thus “filed” pursuant to the Prison 2 Mailbox Rule (i.e., July 19, 2019). ACCORDINGLY, it is ORDERED that Chief Magistrate Judge Baxter’s Report-Recommendation (Dkt. No. 7) is ACCEPTED and ADOPTED in its entirety; and it is further ORDERED that Plaintiff’s second motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis (Dkt. No. 4) is DENIED; and it is further ORDERED that Plaintiff’s Complaint (Dkt. No. 1) shall be DISMISSED without prejudice and without further Order of this Court UNLESS, within THIRTY (30) DAYS of the date of this Decision and Order, Plaintiff pays the Court’s filing fee of four hundred dollars ($400.00); and it is further ORDERED that, should Plaintiff comply with this Decision and Order, the Clerk shall return the file to Chief Magistrate Judge Baxter for his review of Plaintiff’s Complaint in accordance with 28 U.S.C. § 1915(A). Dated: November 15, 2019 Syracuse, 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.
