Thompson v. Senzer, Esq.
Filing
19
ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS: The Court has reviewed the record and, finding no clear error, adopts the R & R as the opinion of the Court. The Court hereby remands this action back to state court. The Clerk of Court is directed to close this case. So Ordered by Judge Joan M. Azrack on 3/3/2017. (Ortiz, Grisel)
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK
----------------------------------------------------------------X
In the Matter of the Application of M.G.
THOMPSON,
Petitioner,
For Online Publication Only
ORDER ADOPTING REPORT
AND RECOMMENDATION
15-CV-3736 (JMA)(ARL)
-againstPAUL H. SENZER, ESQ., a Judicial Hearing
Officer at the Suffolk County Traffic and Parking
Violation Agency,
Respondent.
------------------------------------------------------------X
AZRACK, United States District Judge:
FILED
CLERK
3/3/2017 4:39 pm
U.S. DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK
LONG ISLAND OFFICE
Petitioner M.G. Thompson brings this special proceeding under Article 78 of the N.Y.
C.P.L.R. against Judicial Hearing Officer Paul H. Senzer. Senzer, who removed the proceeding
to this Court, has moved to dismiss. The Court sua sponte directed the parties to address whether
the Court has subject matter jurisdiction over this action. The Court then referred the motion to
dismiss to the Honorable Arlene R. Lindsay, United States Magistrate Judge, for a report and
recommendation. In a Report and Recommendation dated February 16, 2017 (“the R&R”),
Magistrate Judge Lindsay recommended that this removed matter be remanded to state court.
No party has objected to the R & R, and the time for doing so has passed. When deciding
whether to adopt a report and recommendation, a district court “may accept, reject, or modify, in
whole or in part, the findings or recommendations made by the magistrate judge.” 28 U.S.C. §
636(b)(1). “To accept the report and recommendation of a magistrate, to which no timely objection
has been made, a district court need only satisfy itself that there is no clear error on the face of the
record.” Jarvis v. N. Am. Globex Fund, L.P., 823 F. Supp. 2d 161, 163 (E.D.N.Y.2011) (internal
quotation marks and citation omitted). The Court has reviewed the record and, finding no clear
1
error, adopts the R & R as the opinion of the Court. The Court hereby remands this action back to
state court. The Clerk of Court is directed to close this case.
SO ORDERED.
Date: March 3, 2017
Central Islip, New York
_____/s/ (JMA)___________
Joan M. Azrack
United States District Judge
2
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?