Krowicki et al v. Sayemour et al, No. 6:2016cv01186 - Document 9 (N.D.N.Y 2017)
Court Description: DECISION and ORDER adopting Report and Recommendations re 6 Report and Recommendation. ORDERED that Plaintiffs' HIPPA claims and Fourth Amendment claims are DISMISSED with prejudice; the remainder of plaintiffs' complaint is DISMISSED without prejudice; and the file is referred back to Magistrate Judge Baxter for review of plaintiffs' proposed amended complaint. IT IS SO ORDERED. Signed by Judge David N. Hurd on June 28, 2017. (Copy served via regular and certified mail) (khr)
Download PDF
<![CDATA[
Krowicki et al v. Sayemour et al Doc. 9 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK -------------------------------JUSTYN KROWICKI and ALLISON BAUM, Plaintiffs, -v- 6:16-cv-1186 (DNH/ATB) TIMOTHY SAYEMOUR, Commissioner of DSS/CPS; JACKIE ASNOE, HCDSS Attorney; COLLETTE FREDRICKS, CPS Worker; and KATHY LYNDECKER, Case Worker, Defendants. -------------------------------APPEARANCES: JUSTYN KROWICKI ALLISON BAUM Plaintiffs pro se 111 Park Ave Apt. 1 Herkimer, New York 13350 DAVID N. HURD United States District Judge DECISION and ORDER Pro se plaintiffs Justyn Krowicki and Allison Baum brought this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. On October 5, 2016, the Honorable Andrew T. Baxter, United States Magistrate Judge, advised by Report-Recommendation that plaintiffs' complaint be dismissed with prejudice as to any HIPPA claims and as to any Fourth Amendment claims brought by the named plaintiffs. Magistrate Judge Baxter further recommended that the Dockets.Justia.com remainder of the complaint be dismissed without prejudice and that plaintiffs be afforded an opportunity to file a proposed amended complaint for review. Though premature and prior to the adoption or rejection of the Report-Recommendation by the undersigned, plaintiffs filed a proposed amended complaint. Based upon a careful review of the entire file and the recommendations of the Magistrate Judge, the Report-Recommendation is accepted in whole. See 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). In accordance with the same, this matter is referred back to Magistrate Judge Baxter for review of plaintiffs' proposed amended complaint. Therefore, it is ORDERED that 1. Plaintiffs' HIPPA claims and Fourth Amendment claims are DISMISSED with prejudice; 2. The remainder of plaintiffs' complaint is DISMISSED without prejudice; and 3. The file is referred back to Magistrate Judge Baxter for review of plaintiffs' proposed amended complaint. IT IS SO ORDERED. Dated: June 28, 2017 Utica, New York. 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.
