Dabney et al v. Sawyer et al, No. 9:2011cv00273 - Document 42 (N.D.N.Y 2012)

Court Description: DECISION and ORDER: ORDERED that 41 Report and Recommendation is approved and adopted in its entirety. ORDERED that 27 Motion to Dismiss for Failure to State a Claim is DENIED. Defendants are directed to respond only to the handwritten por tion of the Complaint (Dkt. No. 1-1). ORDERED, that the Clerk of the Court update the Docket Report so that the names of the following Defendants are corrected: Defendant Berggen's name should be spelled "Bergen"; Defendant Sharon Lockridge should be changed to "Sara Nephew f/k/a Sara Loughran"; and Defendant Batter's name should be spelled "Battu". Signed by Senior Judge Lawrence E. Kahn on 8/7/12. {order served via regular mail on all non-ecf parties}(nas)

Download PDF

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK BARTRAM YIHNI DABNEY, Plaintiff, -against- 9:11-CV-0273 (LEK/RFT) DONALD SAWYER, Executive Director, Marcy Mental Health Hospital; JOANNE WALDRON, Chief, OMH Satellite, Clinton Correctional Facility; DR. LEE, Clinton Correctional Facility; DR. FAROOKI, Clinton Correctional Facility; SHARON LOCKRIDGE, OMH Therapist, Clinton Correctional Facility; SAVAGE, OMH Therapist, Clinton Correctional Facility; RON DUMONT, Nurse, Clinton Correctional Facility; C.O. BEESHAW, Clinton Correctional Facility; J. NOCERA, Assistant Inspector General; V. DONAHUE, Social Worker, Great Meadow Correctional Facility; DR. BERGGEN, Clinton Correctional Facility; C.O. FOLEY, Clinton Correctional Facility; and DR. BATTER, Great Meadow Correctional Facility, Defendants. DECISION and ORDER This matter comes before the Court following a Report-Recommendation filed on July 17, 2012 by the Honorable Randolph F. Treece, United States Magistrate Judge, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b) and Northern District of New York Local Rule 72.3(d). Dkt. No. 16 ( ReportRecommendation ). Within fourteen days after a party has been served with a copy of a magistrate judge s reportrecommendation, the party may serve and file specific, written objections to the proposed findings and recommendations. FED . R. CIV . P. 72(b); N.D.N.Y. L.R. 72.1(c). If no objections are filed . . . reviewing courts should review a report and recommendation for clear error. Edwards v. Fischer, 414 F. Supp. 2d 342, 346-47 (S.D.N.Y. 2006) (citations omitted). Here, no objections have been raised in the allotted time with respect to Magistrate Judge Treece s Report-Recommendation. After examining the record, the Court has determined that the Report-Recommendation is not subject to attack for clear error or manifest injustice. Accordingly, it is hereby: ORDERED, that the Report-Recommendation (Dkt. No. 41) is APPROVED and ADOPTED in its ENTIRETY; and it is further ORDERED, that Defendants Motion to Dismiss (Dkt. No. 27) is DENIED and that Defendants are directed to respond only to the handwritten portion of the Complaint (Dkt. No. 1-1); and it is further ORDERED, that the Clerk of the Court update the Docket Report so that the names of the following Defendants are corrected: Defendant Berggen s name should be spelled Bergen ; Defendant Sharon Lockridge should be changed to Sara Nephew f/k/a Sara Loughran ; and Defendant Batter s name should be spelled Battu ; and it is further ORDERED, that the Clerk of the Court serve a copy of this Decision and Order upon the parties to this action. IT IS SO ORDERED. DATED: August 07, 2012 Albany, 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.