Lewis v. Wallace et al, No. 9:2011cv00867 - Document 40 (N.D.N.Y 2013)

Court Description: DECISION and ORDER: Based upon a de novo review, the 33 Report- Recommendation is accepted. ORDERED that Defendants' 24 motion for summary judgment is GRANTED; and The complaint is DISMISSED. The Clerk is directed to enter judgment accordingly and close the file. IT IS SO ORDERED. Signed by Judge David N. Hurd on 4/12/2013. (ptm) (Copy served on plaintiff by regular mail )

Download PDF
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK -------------------------------ROBERT L. LEWIS, Plaintiff, -v- No. 9:11-CV-0867 (DNH/DEP) CAROL WALLACE, Nurse Administrator, Cayuga County Jail, in her individual and official capacity; JACKIE WOJESKI, Nurse Administrator, Cayuga County Jail, in her individual and official capacity; and JOHN GLEASON, Sergeant, Cayuga County Jail, in his individual and official capacity, Defendants. -------------------------------APPEARANCES: OF COUNSEL: ROBERT LEE LEWIS Plaintiff Pro Se 14708 Cayuga County Jail 7445 County House Road Auburn, NY 13021 OFFICE OF FRANK W. MILLER Attorney for Defendants 6575 Kirkville Road East Syracuse, NY 13057 FRANK W. MILLER, ESQ. BRYAN N. GEORGIADY, ESQ. DAVID N. HURD United States District Judge DECISION and ORDER Plaintiff brought this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. On February 22, 2013, the Honorable David E. Peebles, United States Magistrate Judge, advised, by Report-Recommendation that defendants' motion for summary judgment be granted and the complaint be dismissed. Plaintiff timely filed objections to the Report-Recommendation. Defendants belatedly 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 1. Defendants' motion for summary judgment is GRANTED; and 2. The complaint is DISMISSED. The Clerk is directed to enter judgment accordingly and close the file. IT IS SO ORDERED. Dated: April 12, 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.