Nicholson v. Hammond et al, No. 9:2013cv00748 - Document 80 (N.D.N.Y 2016)

Court Description: DECISION AND ORDER: ORDERED, that the 78 Report-Recommendation is adopted for the reasons stated therein. ORDERED, that the Defendants' motion for summary judgement, dkt. # 69 is hereby GRANTED. ORDERED, that plaintiff's motion for summary judgment, dkt. # 74 is hereby DENIED. ORDERED, that plaintiff's complaint is hereby DISMISSED IN ITS ENTIRETY. Signed by Senior Judge Thomas J. McAvoy on 6/16/16. (served on plaintiff by regular and certified mail) (alh, )

Download PDF
Nicholson v. Hammond et al Doc. 80 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK JAMES W. NICHOLSON, Plaintiff, v. 9:13-cv-748 (TJM/DEP) M. HAMMOND, et al., Defendants. Thomas J. McAvoy, D.J. DECISION and ORDER The Court referred this action, brought pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983, to the Hon. David E. Peebles, United States Magistrate Judge, for a Report and Recommendation pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b) and Rule 72.3(d) of the Local Rules of the Northern District of New York. Plaintiff alleges that the Defendants violated his constitutional rights by failing to process his legal mail, partly in retaliation for filing legal actions against officials. The Report-Recommendation, dated May 19, 2016, recommended that Defendants’ motion for summary judgment be granted and Plaintiff’s cross-motion for summary judgment be denied. No objections to the Report-Recom mendation have been raised. After examining the record, this Court has determined that the ReportRecommendation is not subject to attack for plain error or manifest injustice. The Court therefore adopts the Report-Recommendation and Order for the reasons stated therein. The Report-Recommendation, dkt. # 78, is hereby adopted, and: 1 Dockets.Justia.com 1. The Defendants’ motion for summary judgement, dkt. # 69 is hereby GRANTED; 2. Plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment, dkt. # 74, is hereby DENIED; and 3. The Plaintiff’s complaint is hereby DISMISSED IN ITS ENTIRETY. IT IS SO ORDERED. Dated: June 16, 2016 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.