Shanks v. Burns et al, No. 6:2017cv00719 - Document 6 (N.D.N.Y 2017)

Court Description: DECISION and ORDER: The Magistrate Judge's Report-Recommendation is accepted in whole. See 28 U.S.C.§ 636(b)(1). ORDERED that, this action is DISMISSED with prejudice. The Clerk is directed to enter judgment accordingly and close the file.Signed by Judge David N. Hurd on 9/21/2017. (Copy served via regular and certified mail)(mgh, )

Download PDF
Shanks v. Burns et al Doc. 6 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK -------------------------------BRADFORD L. SHANKS, Plaintiff, -v- 6:17-CV-719 (DNH/TWD) BRIAN D. BURNS, Presiding Judge; JOHN MUEHL, District Attorney; and OTSEGO COUNTY, County Manager/Clerk, Defendants. -------------------------------APPEARANCES: BRADFORD L. SHANKS Plaintiff pro se 12 Fonda Avenue Oneonta, NY 13820 DAVID N. HURD United States District Judge DECISION and ORDER Pro se plaintiff Bradford L. Shanks brought this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. On July 24, 2017, the Honorable Therese Wiley Dancks, United States Magistrate Judge, advised by Report-Recommendation that plaintiff's complaint be dismissed with prejudice for failure to state a claim upon initial review. No objections to the ReportRecommendation have been filed. 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). Therefore, it is ORDERED that 1. This action is DISMISSED with prejudice; and 2. The Clerk is directed to enter judgment accordingly and close the file. IT IS SO ORDERED. Dated: September 21, 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.