Goold v. Smith, No. 6:2016cv00413 - Document 6 (N.D.N.Y 2016)
Court Description: DECISION AND ORDER adopting 4 Report and Recommendations and dismissing Pltf's complaint. Signed by Chief Judge Glenn T. Suddaby on 6/24/16. [Served by cert. mail.] (sfp, )
Download PDF
<![CDATA[
Goold v. Smith Doc. 6 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK __________________________________________ JAMES D. GOOLD, III, Plaintiff, 6:16-CV-0413 (GTS/ATB) v. JAIME SMITH, Defendant. __________________________________________ APPEARANCES: JAMES D. GOOLD, III 1142 Brinkreoff Avenue Utica, New York 13501 GLENN T. SUDDABY, Chief United States District Judge DECISION and ORDER Currently before the Court, in this pro se civil rights action filed by James D. Goold, III (“Plaintiff”) against Jaime Smith (“Defendant”), are (1) United States Magistrate Andrew T. Baxter’s Report-Recommendation recommending that this action be sua sponte dismissed with prejudice for failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted, and (2) Plaintiff’s Objection to the Report-Recommendation. (Dkt. Nos. 4, 5.) 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. (Dkt. No. 4.) To those reasons, the Court adds only that, even if it were inclined to consider the allegations contained in, and the documents attached, to Plaintiff’s objections (which it is not inclined to do, because they were Dockets.Justia.com never presented to Magistrate Judge Baxter), the Court would find that, at most, Plaintiff has a state law claim against Defendant (e.g., for breach of fiduciary duty or perhaps breach of contract), which would be appropriately pursued in state court. ACCORDINGLY, it is ORDERED that Magistrate Judge Baxter’s Report-Recommendation (Dkt. No. 4) is ACCEPTED and ADOPTED in its entirety; and it is further ORDERED that Plaintiff’s Complaint (Dkt. No. 1) is DISMISSED. Dated: June 24, 2016 Syracuse, New York ____________________________________ HON. GLENN T. SUDDABY Chief United States District Judge 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.
