Castro v. City of New York et al

Filing 18

ORDER ADOPTING 17 REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS of Magistrate Judge Pollak in its entirety. The court GRANTS Defendants' motion for summary judgment. The Clerk of Court is respectfully directed to close the case. Ordered by Judge Nicholas G. Garaufis on 10/18/2012. (Lee, Tiffeny)

Download PDF
FILED IN CLERK'S OFFICE U S DISTRICT COURT E.D.NY * OCT 2 2 2012 * UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK ---------------------------------------------------------------------){ BROOKLYN OFFICE LUIS CASTRO, ORDER Plaintiff, ll-CV-5379 (NGG) (CLP) -against- CITY OF NEW YORK, P.O. DREW SCHLESINGER and JOHN DOES 1-4, Defendants. ---------------------------------------------------------------------){ NICHOLAS G. GARAUFIS, United States District Judge. On November 2, 2011, Plaintiff Luis Castro filed this Complaint against Defendants City of New York, Police Officer Drew Schlesinger, and John Does 1-4 alleging various claims arising from an allegedly unlawful arrest. (Compi. (Dkt. 1).) On March 12,2012, Defendants submitted a motion for summary judgment (Dkt. 9), which was referred to Magistrate Judge Cheryl L. Pollak for a report and recommendation ("R&R") (Jan. 10,2012, Minute Entry). Plaintiff had filed a previous lawsuit against the City of New York and another police officer related to a separate allegedly unlawful arrest, which was settled on September 6, 2011. See Castro v. City of New York, No. l1-CV-290 (RJD) (SMG) (E.D.N.Y. Sept. 6,2011), Dkt. 11. Defendants argue that the release Plaintiff executed in connection with that settlement precludes the instant action. (Def. Summ. J. Mem. (Dkt. 10).) On March 27, 2012, Plaintiffs counsel informed Judge Pollak that "[a]fter careful review of the applicable facts and law[, he] ha[d] decided to not interpose opposition papers to the defendant's [sic] motion for summary judgment." (PI. Ltr. (Dkt. 14).) On June 26,2012, Judge Pollak issued her R&R, recommending that the 1 court grant Defendants' motion for summary judgment on the grounds of release. (R&R (Dkt. 17).) No party has objected to Judge Pollak's R&R, and the time to do so has long passed. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b)(2). Accordingly, the court reviews Judge Pollak's R&R for clear error. See Gesualdi v. Mack Excavation & Trailer Serv., Inc., No. 09-CV-2502 (KAM) (10), 2010 WL 985294, at *1 (E.D.N.Y. Mar. 15,2010); La Torres v. Walker, 216 F. Supp. 2d 157, 159 (S.D.N.Y. 2000); cf. 28 U.S.C. ยง 636(b)(l). Finding no clear error in the R&R, the court adopts it in its entirety. See Porter v. Potter, 219 F. App'x 112 (2d Cir. 2007). Accordingly, the court GRANTS Defendants' motion for summary judgment. The Clerk of Court is respectfully directed to close the case. SO ORDERED. s/Nicholas G. Garaufis NICHOLAS G~ GARAUFIS United States District Judge Dated: Brooklyn, New York October 2012 l!, 2 Q)

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.

Why Is My Information Online?