Griffin v. Donelli et al, No. 9:2005cv01072 - Document 95 (N.D.N.Y 2010)

Court Description: DECISION AND ORDER granting 79 Motion for Summary Judgment; adopting 90 Report and Recommendations; Complaint is dismissed in its entirety. Signed by Senior Judge Thomas J. McAvoy on 2/24/10. (sfp, )

Download PDF
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK __________________________________________ DANIEL GEORGE GRIFFIN, Plaintiff, v. No. 05-CV-1072 (TJM/DRH) JOHN J. DONELLI. Superintendent, Bare Hill Correctional Facility; PIPEN, Sgt.; L. JUBBERT, Deputy Superintendent of Security; M. WARNER, Registered Nurse, Bare Hill Correctional Facility; DANIEL BENWARE, Director of Transitional Services; T. BRIQUER, Correctional Officer; and SGT. GARDNER, Defendants ___________________________________________ Thomas J. McAvoy, Sr. U.S. District Judge DECISION & ORDER This pro se civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 was referred to the Hon. David R Homer, United States Magistrate Judge, for a Report-Recommendation pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b) and Local Rule 72.3(c). The Report-Recommendation dated November 24, 2009 recommended that the Defendants motion for summary judgment be granted. Plaintiff filed objections to the Report- 1 Recommendation, essentially raising the same arguments presented to the Magistrate Judge. 1 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 Magistrate Judge Homer for the reasons stated in the Report-Recommendation. It is therefore ORDERED that Defendants Motion for Summary Judgement is GRANTED. The Complaint is dismissed in its entirety. IT IS SO ORDERED. Dated:February 24, 2010 1 When objections to a magistrate judge s Report-Recommendation are lodged, 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. 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.