Harris v. Taylor et al

Filing 26

ORDER that 24 Report and Recommendations is APPROVED and ADOPTED in its entirety; ORDERED that 19 Motion for Partial Summary Judgment is DENIED and ORDERED that 20 Motion for Summary Judgment is GRANTED. Signed by Senior Judge Lawrence E. Kahn on 7/29/10. {order served via regular mail on all non-ecf parties}(nas)

Download PDF
Harris v. Taylor et al Doc. 26 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK FREDDIE HARRIS Plaintiff, -againstJUSTIN A. TAYLOR, JONATHAN NOCERA, ALAN TAYLOR Defendants. 9:09-CV-705 (LEK/GHL) DECISION AND ORDER This matter comes before the Court following a Report-Recommendation filed on July 14, 2010 by the Honorable George H. Lowe, United States Magistrate Judge, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 636(b) and L.R. 72.3 of the Northern District of New York. Report-Rec. (Dkt. No. 24). On July 26, 2010, Plaintiff Freddie Harris ("Plaintiff") filed objections to Report-Recommendation. Dkt. No. 25 ("Objections"). This Court is to "make a de novo determination of those portions of the report or specified proposed findings or recommendations to which objection is made." 28 U.S.C. 636(b). "A [district] judge . . . may accept, reject, or modify, in whole or in part, the findings or recommendations made by the magistrate judge." Id. Where, however, an objecting "`party makes only conclusory or general objections, or simply reiterates his original arguments, the Court reviews the Report and Recommendation only for clear error.'" Farid v. Bouey, 554 F. Supp. 2d 301, 307 (N.D.N.Y. 2008) (quoting McAllan v. Von Essen, 517 F. Supp. 2d 672, 679 (S.D.N.Y. 2007) (citations and quotations omitted); see also Brown v. Peters, No. 95-CV-1641, 1997 WL 599355, at *2-3 (N.D.N.Y. Sept. 22, Dockets.Justia.com 1997). "A [district] judge . . . 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). The Court has considered the Objections, has undertaken a de novo review of the record, and has determined that the Report-Recommendation should be approved for the reasons stated therein. Accordingly, it is hereby ORDERED, that the Report-Recommendation (Dkt. No. 24) is APPROVED and ADOPTED in its ENTIRETY; and it is further ORDERED, that Plaintiff's Motion for summary judgment (Dkt. No. 19) is DENIED, and it is further ORDERED, Defendants' Cross-Motion for summary judgment (Dkt. No. 20) is GRANTED, and it is further ORDERED, that the Clerk serve a copy of this Order on all parties. IT IS SO ORDERED. DATED: July 29, 2010 Albany, 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?