Levesque v. Clinton County Correctional Facility, No. 9:2010cv00787 - Document 153 (N.D.N.Y 2013)
Court Description: DECISION and ORDER: Plaintiff brought this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 and the Americans with Disabilities Act. On May 24, 2013, the Honorable David E. Peebles, United States Magistrate Judge, advised, by Report-Recommen dation that plaintiff's complaint be dismissed in its entirety. Plaintiff timely filed objections to the Report- Recommendation, along with five additional submissions between the time the Report- Recommendation was issued and the deadline for objections. Defendants timely filed a response to plaintiff'sobjections. Based upon a de novo review, the 138 Report-Recommendation is accepted. See 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). Therefore, it is ORDERED that Plaintiff's complaint is dismissed. The Clerk is directed to enter judgment accordingly. Signed by Judge David N. Hurd on 6/26/2013. (ptm) (Copy served on plaintiff by regular mail)
Download PDF
<![CDATA[
Levesque v. Clinton County Correctional Facility Doc. 153 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK -------------------------------ANDRE R. LEVESQUE, Plaintiff, -v- No. 9:10-CV-0787 (DNH/DEP) CLINTON COUNTY, also known as Clinton County Correctional Facility; JOHN DOE, Lieutenant; and JOHN DOE(S), Corrections Guards, Defendants. -------------------------------APPEARANCES: OF COUNSEL: ANDRE R. LEVESQUE, Plaintiff Pro Se 20090446 Clinton County Jail 25 McCarthy Drive Plattsburgh, NY 12901 LEMIRE JOHNSON, LLC Attorneys for Defendant Clinton County P.O. Box 2485 2534 Route 9 Malta, NY 12020 GREGG T. JOHNSON, ESQ. APRIL J. LAWS, ESQ. MARY ELIZABETH KISSANE, ESQ. DAVID N. HURD United States District Judge DECISION and ORDER Plaintiff brought this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 and the Americans with Disabilities Act. On May 24, 2013, the Honorable David E. Peebles, United States Magistrate Judge, advised, by Report-Recommendation that plaintiff's complaint be Dockets.Justia.com dismissed in its entirety. Plaintiff timely filed objections to the Report-Recommendation, along with five additional submissions between the time the Report-Recommendation was issued and the deadline for objections. Defendants timely filed a response to plaintiff's objections. Based upon a de novo review, the Report-Recommendation is accepted. See 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). Therefore, it is ORDERED that Plaintiff's complaint is dismissed. The Clerk is directed to enter judgment accordingly. IT IS SO ORDERED. Dated: June 26, 2013 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.
