Woodward v. Doe #1 et al, No. 9:2018cv00083 - Document 90 (N.D.N.Y 2020)

Court Description: DECISION AND ORDER: ORDERED that based upon a careful review of entire file and the recommendations of theMagistrate Judge, the 85 Report-Recommendation is accepted in whole. See 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). ORDERED that Defendants' 70 motion for summary judgment based on failure to exhaust is DENIED without prejudice as premature. Signed by Judge David N. Hurd on 4/24/2020. {order served via regular mail on plaintiff}(nas)

Download PDF
Woodward v. Doe #1 et al Doc. 90 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK -------------------------------SHAWN WOODWARD, Plaintiff, -v- 9:18-CV-83 (DNH/DJS) J. GORI, Correctional Officer, formerly known as John Doe #1; GELETA, Correctional Sergeant, formerly known as John Doe #2; and K. CITUK, Correctional Officer, formerly known as John Doe #3, Defendants. -------------------------------APPEARANCES: SHAWN WOODWARD Plaintiff pro se SBI # 977468B South Woods State Prison INM# 280741 215 Burlington Road South Bridgeton, NJ05302 HON. LETITIA JAMES Attorney General for the State of New York Attorney for Defendants The Capitol Albany, NY 12224 RYAN L. ABEL, ESQ. Ass't Attorney General DAVID N. HURD United States District Judge DECISION and ORDER Pro se plaintiff Shawn Woodward brought this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. On March 31, 2020, the Honorable Daniel J. Stew art, United States Dockets.Justia.com Magistrate Judge, advised by Report-Recommendation that defendants' motion for summary judgment based on failure to exhaust be denied without prejudice as premature. No objections to the Report- Recommendation were filed. Based upon a careful review of entire file and the recommendations of the Magistrate Judge, the Report-Recommendation is accepted in whole. See 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). Therefore, it is ORDERED that Defendants' motion for summary judgment based on failure to exhaust is DENIED without prejudice as premature. IT IS SO ORDERED. Dated: April 24, 2020 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.