-RFT Desmarat v. Artus et al, No. 9:2008cv00977 - Document 63 (N.D.N.Y 2011)
Court Description: DECISION and ORDER re 61 Report and Recommendations. ORDERED that Defendants' motion for summary judgment (Dkt. No. 50 ) is GRANTED; ORDERED that The action is DISMISSED and the Clerk is instructed to file judgment accordingly and close the file. Signed by Judge David N. Hurd on 4/25/2011. (served plaintiff by regular mail)(mnc)
Download PDF
<![CDATA[
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ JEAN MARC DESMARAT, Plaintiff, vs 9:08-CV-977 DALE ARTUS, Superintendent; LINDA TURNER, Deputy Superintendent/Program; MICHAEL R. VINCENT, Correctional Officer; and JOHN DOE, APPU Inmate/Law Library Clerk, All of Clinton Correctional Facility, Defendants. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ APPEARANCES: OF COUNSEL; JEAN MARC DESMARAT Plaintiff, Pro Se 03-A-6318 Clinton Correctional Facility PO Box 2001 Dannemora, NY 12929 HON. ERIC T. SCHNEIDERMAN Attorney General of the State of New York Attorney for Defendants Department of Law The Capitol Albany, New York 12224 CHRISTOPHER W. HALL, ESQ. Asst. Attorney General DAVID N. HURD United States District Judge DECISION and ORDER Plaintiff, Jean Marc Desmarat, commenced this civil rights action in September 2008, pursuant to 42 U.S.C. ยง 1983. By Report-Recommendation dated March 25, 2011, the Honorable Randolph F. Treece, United States Magistrate Judge, recommended that defendants notion for summary judgment (Dkt. No. 50) be granted and the entire action be dismissed. The defendants have filed objections to the report-recommendation. Based upon a de novo review of the entire file, including the portions of the ReportRecommendation to which defendants have objected, and the recommendations of Magistrate Judge Treece, the Report-Recommendation is accepted and adopted in all respects. See 28 U.S.C. 636(b)(1). Accordingly, it is ORDERED that 1. Defendants motion for summary judgment (Dkt. No. 50) is GRANTED; 2. The action is DISMISSED and the Clerk is instructed to file judgment accordingly and close the file. IT IS SO ORDERED. Dated: April 25, 2011 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.
