Brennan v. Broome County, New York et al
Filing
11
DECISION AND ORDER: that the Report-Recommendation is accepted and adopted in all respects and that Plaintiff's complaint is Dismissed as against defendant Behnke and that this matter is referred back to Magistrate Judge Peebles for further proceedings. Signed by Judge David N. Hurd on 07/05/2017. (Copy of the Decision and Order was served via regular mail upon the pro se plaintiff on 7/5/2017.)(hmr)
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK
-------------------------------KEVIN JOSEPH GABRIEL BRENNAN,
Plaintiff,
-v-
3:17-cv-122
(DNH/DEP)
BROOME COUNTY, NEW YORK and ROBERT
BEHNKE, Broome County Attorney,
Defendants.
-------------------------------APPEARANCES:
KEVIN JOSEPH GABRIEL BRENNAN
Plaintiff pro se
319 Exchange Avenue
Townhouse #20
Endicott, New York 13760
DAVID N. HURD
United States District Judge
DECISION and ORDER
Pro se plaintiff Kevin Joseph Gabriel Brennan brought this action alleging violations of
the Americans with Disabilities Act, as amended, 42 U.S.C. § 12101 et seq. On May 2,
2017, the Honorable David E. Peebles, United States Magistrate Judge, advised by ReportRecommendation that plaintiff's claims against defendant Behnke be dismissed, without
leave to replead, and that plaintiff be permitted to proceed with his claims against defendant
Broome County. Plaintiff timely filed an objection to the Report-Recommendation along with
a proposed amended complaint, and an additional letter further explaining his objections.
Based upon a de novo review of the portions of the Report-Recommendation to which
plaintiff objected, the Report-Recommendation is accepted and adopted in all respects. See
28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1).
Therefore, it is
ORDERED that
1. Plaintiff's complaint is DISMISSED as against defendant Behnke; and
2. This matter is referred back to Magistrate Judge Peebles for further proceedings.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated: July 5, 2017
Utica, New York.
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?