Dabney et al v. Sawyer et al
Filing
42
DECISION and ORDER: ORDERED that 41 Report and Recommendation is approved and adopted in its entirety. ORDERED that 27 Motion to Dismiss for Failure to State a Claim is DENIED. Defendants are directed to respond only to the handwritten por tion of the Complaint (Dkt. No. 1-1). ORDERED, that the Clerk of the Court update the Docket Report so that the names of the following Defendants are corrected: Defendant Berggen's name should be spelled "Bergen"; Defendant Sharon Lockridge should be changed to "Sara Nephew f/k/a Sara Loughran"; and Defendant Batter's name should be spelled "Battu". Signed by Senior Judge Lawrence E. Kahn on 8/7/12. {order served via regular mail on all non-ecf parties}(nas)
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK
BARTRAM YIHNI DABNEY,
Plaintiff,
-against-
9:11-CV-0273 (LEK/RFT)
DONALD SAWYER, Executive Director,
Marcy Mental Health Hospital; JOANNE
WALDRON, Chief, OMH Satellite,
Clinton Correctional Facility; DR. LEE,
Clinton Correctional Facility;
DR. FAROOKI, Clinton Correctional
Facility; SHARON LOCKRIDGE, OMH
Therapist, Clinton Correctional Facility;
SAVAGE, OMH Therapist, Clinton
Correctional Facility; RON DUMONT,
Nurse, Clinton Correctional Facility;
C.O. BEESHAW, Clinton Correctional
Facility; J. NOCERA, Assistant Inspector
General; V. DONAHUE, Social Worker,
Great Meadow Correctional Facility;
DR. BERGGEN, Clinton Correctional
Facility; C.O. FOLEY, Clinton
Correctional Facility; and DR. BATTER,
Great Meadow Correctional Facility,
Defendants.
DECISION and ORDER
This matter comes before the Court following a Report-Recommendation filed on July 17,
2012 by the Honorable Randolph F. Treece, United States Magistrate Judge, pursuant to 28 U.S.C.
§ 636(b) and Northern District of New York Local Rule 72.3(d). Dkt. No. 16 (“ReportRecommendation”).
Within fourteen days after a party has been served with a copy of a magistrate judge’s reportrecommendation, the party “may serve and file specific, written objections to the proposed findings
and recommendations.” FED . R. CIV . P. 72(b); N.D.N.Y. L.R. 72.1(c). “If no objections are filed . .
. reviewing courts should review a report and recommendation for clear error.” Edwards v. Fischer,
414 F. Supp. 2d 342, 346-47 (S.D.N.Y. 2006) (citations omitted).
Here, no objections have been raised in the allotted time with respect to Magistrate Judge
Treece’s Report-Recommendation. After examining the record, the Court has determined that the
Report-Recommendation is not subject to attack for clear error or manifest injustice.
Accordingly, it is hereby:
ORDERED, that the Report-Recommendation (Dkt. No. 41) is APPROVED and
ADOPTED in its ENTIRETY; and it is further
ORDERED, that Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss (Dkt. No. 27) is DENIED and that
Defendants are directed to respond only to the handwritten portion of the Complaint (Dkt. No. 1-1);
and it is further
ORDERED, that the Clerk of the Court update the Docket Report so that the names of the
following Defendants are corrected: Defendant Berggen’s name should be spelled “Bergen”;
Defendant Sharon Lockridge should be changed to “Sara Nephew f/k/a Sara Loughran”; and
Defendant Batter’s name should be spelled “Battu”; and it is further
ORDERED, that the Clerk of the Court serve a copy of this Decision and Order upon the
parties to this action.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
DATED:
August 07, 2012
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?