Dean v. Gaul, No. 1:2022cv01014 - Document 22 (N.D.N.Y 2023)
Court Description: DECISION AND ORDER that Magistrate Judge Baxter's Report-Recommendation (Dkt. No. 8 ) is ACCEPTED and ADOPTED in its entirety. Defendant's "reiterated motion (Dkt. No. 18 ) is DENIED. This action is REMANDED to New York State Sup reme Court, Rensselaer County. The Clerk of Court transmit a copy of this Decision and Order to the Clerk of New York State Supreme Court, Rensselaer County. Signed by U.S. District Judge Glenn T. Suddaby on 1/31/2023. (Served Defendant Jeffrey Gaul w/ a copy of this Decision and Order by regular and certified mail. Served a copy of the Decision and Order upon the Clerk of the NYS Supreme Court, Rensselaer County by regular mail) (sal)
Download PDF
<![CDATA[
Dean v. Gaul Doc. 22 Case 1:22-cv-01014-GTS-ATB Document 22 Filed 01/31/23 Page 1 of 3 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK __________________________________________ DAVID A. DEAN, Plaintiff, 1:22-CV-1014 (GTS/ATB) v. JEFFREY GAUL, Defendant. __________________________________________ APPEARANCES: STEPHEN A. PECHENIK, ESQ. Counsel for Plaintiff Rensselaer County Attorney 1600 Seventh Avenue Troy, New York 12180 JEFFREY GAUL Defendant, Pro Se c/o Paula Gaul 2279 Preisman Drive Schenectady, New York 12309 GLENN T. SUDDABY, United States District Judge DECISION and ORDER Currently before the Court, in this breach-of-contract action filed by David A. Dean (“Plaintiff”) against Jeffrey Gaul (“Defendant”), are (1) United States Magistrate Judge Andrew T. Baxter’s Report-Recommendation recommending that the action be remanded to New York State Supreme Court, Rensselaer County, from which it was removed, because of untimeliness and lack of subject-matter jurisdiction, (2) Defendant’s Objections to the ReportRecommendation, (3) Defendant’s Notice of New Facts in Support of Removal, and (4) Plaintiff’s opposition to Defendant’s Objections. (Dkt. Nos. 8, 15, 16, 17.) Dockets.Justia.com Case 1:22-cv-01014-GTS-ATB Document 22 Filed 01/31/23 Page 2 of 3 Also currently before the Court are (1) Defendant’s response to the Court’s Text Order directing Defendant to show cause as to why this action should not be sua sponte dismissed as having been untimely removed pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1446(b),1 (2) Defendant’s “reiterated motion for an extension to file removal at state level, his reply to [Plaintiff’s opposition Defendant’s Objections to the Report-Recommendation], and . . . further arguments in favor of the removal to this Court,” (3) Plaintiff’s opposition to Defendant’s “reiterated motion,” and (4) Defendant’s supplement to his response to the Court’s Text Order to Show Cause. (Dkt. Nos. 7, 14, 18, 19, 20, 21.) The Court has also carefully considered the arguments asserted in Defendant’s “reiterated motion” and related arguments. After carefully reviewing the relevant filings in this action, the Court can find no error in the Report-Recommendation, clear or otherwise: Magistrate Judge Baxter employed the proper standards, accurately recited the facts, and reasonably applied the law to those facts. As a result, the Court accepts and adopts the Report-Recommendation for the reasons stated therein, and remands this action to New York State Supreme Court, Rensselaer County. In addition, the Court denies Defendant’s “reiterated motion” as moot and, in the alternative, as unsupported by a showing of cause. ACCORDINGLY, it is ORDERED that Magistrate Judge Baxter’s Report-Recommendation (Dkt. No. 8) is ACCEPTED and ADOPTED in its entirety; and it is further 1 Because the Court issued its Text Order to Show Cause one day before Magistrate Judge Baxter filed is Report-Recommendation, the Text Order to Show Cause was unnecessary. However, out of special solicitude to Defendant as a pro se litigant, the Court has carefully considered his response(s) to the Court’s Text Order to Show Cause together with his Objections to Magistrate Judge Baxter’s Report-Recommendation. 2 Case 1:22-cv-01014-GTS-ATB Document 22 Filed 01/31/23 Page 3 of 3 ORDERED that Defendant’s “reiterated motion” (Dkt. No. 18) is DENIED; and it is further ORDERED that this action is REMANDED to New York State Supreme Court, Rensselaer County; and it is further ORDERED that the Clerk of Court transmit a copy of this Decision and Order to the Clerk of New York State Supreme Court, Rensselaer County. Dated: January 31, 2023 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.
