Tuitt v. Chase et al
Filing
46
DECISION and ORDER: Pro se plaintiff Brian Tuitt brought this action pursuant o 42 U.S.C. § 1983. On May 22, 2014, the Honorable Thrse Wiley Dancks, United States Magistrate Judge, advised by Report-Recommendation that plaintiff's eq ual protection, access to Courts, procedural due process, verbal harassment, and conspiracy claims be dismissed without leave to amend and that defendants be directed to respond to the remaining claims in the amended complaint. Defendants timel y filed objections to the Report- Recommendation. Based upon a de novo review of the portions of the Report-Recommendation to which defendants objected, the 44 Report-Recommendation is accepted and adopted in all respects. See 28 U.S.C. § 63 6(b)(1). Therefore, it is ORDERED that 1. Plaintiff's equal protection, access to courts, procedural due process, verbal harassment, and conspiracy claims are DISMISSED without leave to amend; 2. Defendants are directed to respond to the following claims in the manner provided for by the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure: (a) the retaliation claim against defendants Chase and Redel regarding nvoluntary Protective Custody placement; (b) the retaliation claim against defendants L opez, Benware, and Chase rgarding transfer to another facility; (c) the retaliation claim against defendant Redel regarding access to the law library and a notary; (d) the retaliation claim against defendant Chase regarding the "SOP" s ign; (e) the retaliation claim against defendants Liemuex, Benware, and Chase regarding the magazine incident; (f) the retaliation claim against defendants Lopez, Benware, and Chase regarding plaintiff's removal from the Sex Offender Counseli ng and Treatment Program; (g) the retaliation claim against defendants Lopez and Benware regarding plaintiff's placement in the general population; and 3. The Clerk is directed to serve a copy of this Decision and Order upon plaintiff in accordance with the Local Rules. Signed by Judge David N. Hurd on 6/27/2014. (ptm) (Copy served on plaintiff by regular mail)
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK
-------------------------------BRIAN TUITT,
9:11-CV-0776
(DNH/TWD)
Plaintiff,
-v-
P. CHASE, M. LOPEZ, N. BENWARE,
LIEMUEX, REDEL, JOHN DOES 1-3,
Defendants.
-------------------------------APPEARANCES:
OF COUNSEL:
BRIAN TUITT, 06-A-1963
Plaintiff pro se
Mid-State Correctional Facility
P.O. Box 2500
Marcy, NY 13403
HON. ERIC T. SCHNEIDERMAN
New York State Attorney General
Attorney for Defendants
The Capitol
Albany, NY12224
CHRISTOPHER W. HALL, ESQ.
Ass't Attorney General
DAVID N. HURD
United States District Judge
DECISION and ORDER
Pro se plaintiff Brian Tuitt brought this action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. On
May 22, 2014, the Honorable Thérèse Wiley Dancks, United States Magistrate Judge,
advised by Report-Recommendation that plaintiff's equal protection, access to courts,
procedural due process, verbal harassment, and conspiracy claims be dismissed without
leave to amend and that defendants be directed to respond to the remaining claims in the
amended complaint. Defendants timely filed objections to the Report-Recommendation.
Based upon a de novo review of the portions of the Report-Recommendation to
which defendants 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 equal protection, access to courts, procedural due process, verbal
harassment, and conspiracy claims are DISMISSED without leave to amend;
2. Defendants are directed to respond to the following claims in the manner
provided for by the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure:
(a) the retaliation claim against defendants Chase and Redel regarding Involuntary
Protective Custody placement;
(b) the retaliation claim against defendants Lopez, Benware, and Chase regarding
transfer to another facility;
(c) the retaliation claim against defendant Redel regarding access to the law library
and a notary;
(d) the retaliation claim against defendant Chase regarding the "SOP" sign;
(e) the retaliation claim against defendants Liemuex, Benware, and Chase
regarding the magazine incident;
(f) the retaliation claim against defendants Lopez, Benware, and Chase regarding
plaintiff's removal from the Sex Offender Counseling and Treatment Program;
-2-
(g) the retaliation claim against defendants Lopez and Benware regarding plaintiff''s
placement in the general population; and
3. The Clerk is directed to serve a copy of this Decision and Order upon plaintiff in
accordance with the Local Rules.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated: June 27, 2014
Utica, New York.
-3-
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?