Smart v. City of New York et al

Filing 39

ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION: Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b) and Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 72, the Court has reviewed the R&R for clear error and, finding none, concurs with the R&R in its entirety. See Covey v. Simonton , 481 F. Supp. 2d 224, 226 (E.D.N.Y. 2007). Accordingly, it is hereby ORDERED that Smart's motion for attorney's fees be granted, and that Smart be awarded $70,277.36, which includes attorney's fees of $66,787.75 and costs of $3,489.61. The Clerk of Court is respectfully directed to enter judgment pursuant to this Order and close the case. Ordered by Judge Roslynn R. Mauskopf on 3/8/2017. (Taronji, Robert)

UNITED STATES DI STRJCT COURT
EASTERN DISTRJCT OF NEW YORK

------------------------------------------------------------------)(
MATTHEW SMART,
Plaintiff,
ORDER ADOPTING
REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION
15-CV- 1405 (RRM) (PK)

- against C ITY OF NEW YORK; WILFRED GUZMAN;
SHEKELE MUHAMMAD; NICHOLAS
PASCHITTI; JAMES PARJS; JWANN LAYTON;
JOHN McCUE; and JOHN/JANE DOES Nos. 1- 10,
Defendants.

------------------------------------------------------------------)(
ROSL YNN R. MAUSKOPF, United States Di strict Judge.
Plaintiff Matthew Smart commenced this acti on against defendants C ity of New York
(the "C ity"), Wil fred Guzman, Shekele Muhammad, N icholas Paschitti , James Pari s, Jwann
Layton, John McCue, and Jolm/Jane Does Nos. 1- 10 ("Guzman," " Shekele," "Paschitti ,"
"Paris," "Layton," and "McCue," co llectively, the "Individual Defendants") pursuant to 42
U.S.C. § 1983 and New York state law, for violations of Smart's rights under the Fourth and
Fourteenth Amendments of the United States Constitution and state law. (See generally Am.
CompI. (Doc. No. 15).) T he Individual Defendants are members of the
Department (the "NYPD"). (Id.

at ~~

ew York City Police

5-7.) Smart all eges that he was fa lsely arrested , subjected

to excessive fo rce, and illegally strip-searched by some of the Individual Defenda nts and
John/Jane Does, and that others failed to intervene when these events occun-ed. (Id.

at~~

9-14.)

Smart also a lleges that the NYPD is liable for these actions under the theory of supervisory
li abili ty, pursuant to Monell v. Dep '!of Soc. Servs., 436 U.S. 658 (1978). (Id.

at ~

56-63.)

In a letter dated June 7, 20 16, the parties informed the Court that they had resolved the
case by way of an Offer of Judgment pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure ("Rule") 68.

(6/7116 Letter (Doc. N o. 28).) On August 15, 20 16, Smart filed a motion for attorney's fees.
(Mot. Att'y Fees (Doc. No. 32).)
On February 17, 2017, the assigned Magistrate Judge, the Honorable Peggy Kuo, issued a
Report and Recommendation ("R&R"), a copy of which was mailed to defendants on February
18, 2017, recommending that Smart's motion for attorney's fees be granted, and that Smart be
awarded $70,277.36 in attorney's fees and costs. (See R&R (Doc. No. 37).) Judge Kuo
reminded the parties that, pursuant to Rule 72(b), any objections to the R&R must be filed within
fourteen days of service. (R&R at 7.) The fourteen days has passed, (see Deel. of Service (Doc.
No. 38)), and no party has filed any objection.
Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b) and Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 72, the Court has
reviewed the R&R for clear error and, finding none, concurs with the R&R in its entirety. See

Covey v. Simonton, 481 F. Supp. 2d 224, 226 (E .D.N.Y. 2007).
Accordingly, it is hereby ORDERED that Smart's motion for attorney's fees be granted,
and that Smart be awarded $70,277.36, which includes attorney's fees of $66,787.75 and costs of
$3,489.61.
The Clerk of Court is respectfully directed to enter judgment pursuant to this Order and
close the case.

SO ORDERED.

Dated: Brooklyn, New York
March 8, 20 17

s/Roslynn R. Mauskopf

2