Boyde v. Fahey, No. 5:2021cv01277 - Document 16 (N.D.N.Y 2022)
Court Description: DECISION AND ORDER: Plaintiffs # 14 objections to the Report-Recommendation of Judge Dancks, are hereby OVERRULED. The # 12 Report-Recommendation, is hereby ACCEPTED and ADOPTED. Plaintiff's # 8 Amended Complaint is hereby DISMISSED WITHOUT LEAVE TO AMEND. The Clerk of Court is directed to CLOSE the case. Signed by Senior Judge Thomas J. McAvoy on 5/26/2022. {Copy of the Decision and Order was served upon Pro Se Plaintiff via regular mail} (pjh, )
Download PDF
<![CDATA[
Boyde v. Fahey Doc. 16 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK __________________________________________ JOHNNY WILLIAM BOYDE, Plaintiff, vs. 5:21-CV-1277 (TJM/TWD) JOSEPH E. FAHEY, Defendant. ___________________________________________ Thomas J. McAvoy, Sr. U.S. District Judge DECISION & ORDER The Court referred this pro se civil action, brought pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983, to Magistrate Judge Thérèse Wiley Dancks for a Report-Recommendation pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b) and Local Rule 72.3(c). Presently before the Court is Plaintiff’s Amended Complaint, filed after the Court accepted and adopted Judge Dancks’s ReportRecommendation and dismissed the initial Complaint with leave to replead. See dkt. # 8. Plaintiff appears to allege that the Defendant, a retired Onondaga County Court Judge, violated Plaintiff’s rights in the way he adjudicated cases involving the Plaintiff. Plaintiff also raises claims about documents he submitted to this Court regarding that criminal case. Judge Dancks gave the Amended Complaint an initial review to determine whether service was appropriate. Judge Dancks’s Report-Recommendation, dkt. # 12, issued on 1 Dockets.Justia.com April 22, 2022, recommends that the Court dismiss the Complaint without leave to amend. Judge Dancks finds that Plaintiff’s claims are frivolous, having no basis in any plausible legal claim or theory. Plaintiff also fails to allege how Defendant violated any of his rights, and instead simply claims that he suffered such a violation. Moreover, the Defendant is immune from any claims Plaintiff seeks to raise regarding his decisions as a judge. Plaintiff objected to the Report-Recommendation. See dkt. # 14. W hen a party objects to a magistrate judge’s Report-Recommendation, the 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). After such a review, the Court may “accept, reject, or modify, in whole or in part, the findings or recommendations made by the magistrate judge. The judge may also receive further evidence or recommit the matter to the magistrate judge with instructions.” Id. Having reviewed the record de novo and having considered the issues raised in the Plaintiff’s objections, this Court has determined to accept and adopt the recommendation of Judge Dancks for the reasons stated in the Report-Recommendation. His objections contain exhibits of transcripts from court proceedings involving the Plaintiff and presided over by the Defendant. Plaintiff does not explain how these transcripts demonstrate that his Amended Pleading states a claim upon which relief could be granted. The Court finds nothing in those transcripts to support a claim, and the arguments Plaintiff offers in his objections are vague and unconvincing. Accordingly: Plaintiff’s objections to the Report-Recommendation of Judge Dancks, dkt. # 14, are hereby OVERRULED. The Report-Recommendation, dkt. # 12, is hereby 2 ACCEPTED and ADOPTED. Plaintiff’s Amended Complaint is hereby DISMISSED WITHOUT LEAVE TO AMEND. The Clerk of Court is directed to CLOSE the case. IT IS SO ORDERED. Dated: May 26, 2022 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.
