Fann v. Graham et al, No. 9:2015cv01339 - Document 136 (N.D.N.Y 2018)

Court Description: DECISION AND ORDER: The 128 Report-Recommendation is accepted in whole. See 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). ORDERED that 1. Plaintiff's 119 motion for summary judgment is DENIED in its entirety; 2. Defendants' 120 motion for summary j udgment is GRANTED in part and DENIED in part; 3. Plaintiff's supervisory liability claims against defendants Fagan and Graham are DISMISSED with prejudice; 4. Plaintiff's Fourteenth Amendment due process claim against defendant Ouimette i s DISMISSED with prejudice; 5. Plaintiff's Fourth Amendment unreasonable search claims against defendants Cornell and Steinberg are DISMISSED with prejudice; 6. Defendants' motion for summary judgment is DENIED as to plaintiff's Fir st Amendment retaliation claim against defendant Thomas; and 7. Defendants' motion for summary judgment is DENIED without prejudice as to plaintiff's First and Fourth Amendment claims against defendants Cornell, Lovejoy, Schramm, and Ederer for the incidents occurring on July 9, 2015, to defendants renewing this argument and requesting a hearing to assess whether plaintiff exhausted his administrative remedies. Signed by Judge David N. Hurd on 3/19/18. (served on plaintiff by regular and certified mail) (alh, )

Download PDF
Fann v. Graham et al Doc. 136 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK -------------------------------JERMAINE FANN, Plaintiff, -v- 9:15-CV-1339 (DNH/CFH) H. GRAHAM, Superintendent Auburn Correctional Facility; LT. OUIMETTE1, Lieutenant, Auburn Correctional Facility; SGT. EDERER, Sergeant, Auburn Correctional Facility; M. CORNELL, Correctional Officer, Auburn Correctional Facility; LOVEJOY, Correctional Officer, Auburn Correctional Facility; STEINBERG, Correctional Officer, Auburn Correctional Facility, formerly known as Stienberg; C. THOMAS, Correctional Officer, Auburn Correctional Facility; R. F. SCHRAMM, Correctional Officer and Certified Drug Tester, Auburn Correctional Facility, formerly known as R. F. Shramm; and FAGAN, Deputy Superintendent of Security, Auburn Correctional Facility, in his official capacity, Defendants. -------------------------------APPEARANCES: OF COUNSEL: JERMAINE FANN Plaintiff pro se 430 Main Street - Apt. #306 Dunkirk, NY 14048 HON. ERIC T. SCHNEIDERMAN Attorney General for the State of New York Attorney for Defendants The Capitol Albany, NY 12224 1 WILLIAM A. SCOTT, ESQ. NICOLE E. HAIMSON, ESQ. Ass't Attorneys General The Clerk is directed to amend the docket to reflect the correct spelling of Lt. Ouimette's name. Dockets.Justia.com DAVID N. HURD United States District Judge DECISION and ORDER Pro se plaintiff Jermaine Fann brought this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. On January 11, 2018, the Honorable Christian F. Hummel, United States Magistrate Judge, advised by Report-Recommendation that defendants' motion for summary judgment be granted in part and denied in part, and plaintif f's motion for summary judgment be denied in its entirety. Plaintiff and defendants filed timely objections to the Report-Recommendation, and defendants submitted an additional though untimely response to plaintiff's objections. Based upon a careful review of the Report-Recommendation and the portions to which the parties objected, the Report-Recommendation is accepted in whole. See 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). Therefore, it is ORDERED that 1. Plaintiff's motion for summary judgment is DENIED in its entirety; 2. Defendants' motion for summary judgment is GRANTED in part and DENIED in part; 3. Plaintiff's supervisory liability claims against defendants Fagan and Graham are DISMISSED with prejudice; 4. Plaintiff's Fourteenth Amendment due process claim against defendant Ouimette is DISMISSED with prejudice; 5. Plaintiff's Fourth Amendment unreasonable search claims against defendants Cornell and Steinberg are DISMISSED with prejudice; -2- 6. Defendants' motion for summary judgment is DENIED as to plaintiff's First Amendment retaliation claim against defendant Thomas; and 7. Defendants' motion for summary judgment is DENIED without prejudice as to plaintiff's First and Fourth Amendment claims against defendants Cornell, Lovejoy, Schramm, and Ederer for the incidents occurring on July 9, 2015, to defendants renewing this argument and requesting a hearing to assess whether plaintiff exhausted his administrative remedies. IT IS SO ORDERED. Dated: March 19, 2018 Utica, New York. -3-

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.