Guillory v. Boll et al

Filing 151

ORDER: ORDERS that Magistrate Judge Peebles' August 28, 2014 145 Report-Recommendation is ACCEPTED in its entirety for the reasons stated therein. ORDERS that Defendants' 103 motion for summary judgment is DENIED without prejudice to renew following the completion of discovery. ORDERS that this matter is referred to Magistrate Judge Peebles for all further pretrial matters. Signed by Senior Judge Frederick J. Scullin, Jr. on 9/22/14. (served on plaintiff by regular mail) (alh, )

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK
_______________________________________________
PATRICK GUILLORY,
Plaintiff,
v.

9:12-CV-1771
(FJS/DEP)

MAUREEN BOLL, Deputy Commissioner and
Counsel, Department of Corrections and Community
Supervision; and B. JOHNSTON, Lieutenant,
Bare Hill Correctional Facility,
Defendants.
_______________________________________________
APPEARANCES

OF COUNSEL

PATRICK GUILLORY
09-B-0714
Clinton Correctional Facility
P.O. Box 2002
Dannemora, New York 12929
Plaintiff pro se
OFFICE OF THE NEW YORK
STATE ATTORNEY GENERAL
The Capitol
Albany, New York 12224
Attorneys for Defendants

KEITH J. STARLING, AAG

SCULLIN, Senior Judge
ORDER
Plaintiff commenced this action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983, alleging deprivation of his
civil rights. Specifically, with respect to the two Defendants remaining in this action, Plaintiff
asserted that they conspired to, and did, issue him a false misbehavior report in retaliation for his
filing grievances and a lawsuit against DOCCS officials.

Following the close of discovery, Defendants filed a motion for summary judgment, see
Dkt. No. 103, which Plaintiff opposed, see Dkt. No. 127. On August 28, 2014, Magistrate Judge
Peebles issued a Report and Recommendation, in which he denied Defendants' motion with leave
to renew after the close of discovery. See Dkt. No. 145. The parties did not file any objections to
Magistrate Judge Peebles' recommendation.
When a party does not object to a magistrate judge's report-recommendation, the court
reviews that report-recommendation for clear error or manifest injustice. See Linares v.
Mahunik, No. 9:05-CV-625, 2009 WL 3165660, *10 (N.D.N.Y. July 16, 2009) (citation and
footnote omitted). After conducting that review, "the Court may 'accept, reject, or modify, in
whole or in part, the . . . recommendations made by the magistrate judge.'" Id. (quoting 28
U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C)).
The Court has reviewed Magistrate Judge Peebles' August 28, 2014 Report and
Recommendation for clear error and manifest injustice; and, finding none, the Court hereby
ORDERS that Magistrate Judge Peebles' August 28, 2014 Report-Recommendation is
ACCEPTED in its entirety for the reasons stated therein; and the Court further
ORDERS that Defendants' motion for summary judgment is DENIED without
prejudice to renew following the completion of discovery; and the Court further
ORDERS that this matter is referred to Magistrate Judge Peebles for all further pretrial
matters; and the Court further

-2-

ORDERS that the Clerk of the Court shall serve a copy of this Order on the parties in
accordance with the Local Rules.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: September 22, 2014
Syracuse, New York

-3-