Woodward v. Afify et al, No. 1:2014cv00856 - Document 159 (W.D.N.Y. 2019)

Court Description: DECISION AND ORDER adopting Magistrate Judge Michael J. Roemer's 143 Report and Recommendation. Defendants' 125 motion to dismiss is granted as to Counsel Livermore and Corrections Officers Sewalt, Corsi, and Otto, but is denied as to pro se plaintiff's First Amendment claims against defendants Muslim Chaplin Afify and Sergeant Krause. A copy of the Decision and Order along with this docket entry have been mailed to Shawn Woodward, 00-A-6563 at FRANKLIN CORRECTIONAL FACILITY, Box 10, Malone, NY 12953-0010 and at Ulster Correctional Facility, PO Box 800, Napanoch, NY 12458. SO ORDERED. Signed by Hon. Richard J. Arcara on 10/22/2019. (LAS)

Download PDF
Woodward v. Afify et al Doc. 159 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK SHAWN WOODWARD, Plaintiff, DECISION AND ORDER 14-CV-856-A v. MUSLIM CHAPLIN AFIFY, et al., Defendants. This case was referred to Magistrate Judge Michael J. Roemer pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1) for the conduct of pretrial proceedings. On September 28, 2018, Magistrate Judge Roemer filed a Report and Recommendation (Dkt. No. 143) recommending that the motion for summary judgment pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 56 of defendants Afify, Corsi, Krause, Livermore, Otto, and T. Sewalt’s (Dkt. No. 125) be granted in part, but denied as to pro se plaintiff’s First Amendment claims against defendants Afify and Krause. On October 15, 2018, defendants filed objections to the Report and Recommendation (Dkt. No. 144). Pro se plaintiff also filed objections to the Report and Recommendation on October 23, 2018 (Dkt. No. 145). On November 13, 2018, plaintiff filed a response to Defendants’ objections (Dkt. No. 147), and defendants filed their response on November 20, 2018 (Dkt. No. 148). Plaintiff filed a reply on December 20, 2018 (Dkt. No. 151), and the matter was deemed submitted. The Court deems oral argument unnecessary. Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §636(b)(1), this Court must make a de novo Dockets.Justia.com determination of those portions of the Report and Recommendation to which objections have been made. Upon de novo review, and after carefully reviewing the submissions from the parties, the Court adopts the Magistrate Judge’s conclusions for the reasons stated by the Magistrate Judge. It is, therefore ORDERED, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1), and for the reasons set forth in Magistrate Judge Roemer’s Report and Recommendation, defendants’ motion to dismiss (Dkt. No. 125) is granted as to Counselor Livermore and Corrections Officers Sewalt, Corsi, and Otto, but is denied as to pro se plaintiff’s First Amendment claims against defendants Muslim Chaplin Afify and Sergeant Krause. IT IS SO ORDERED. ___s/Richard J. Arcara________ HONORABLE RICHARD J. ARCARA UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT Dated: October 22, 2019

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.