Haden v. Hellinger et al

Filing 116

DECISION AND ORDER: ORDERED that the Report and Recommendation (Dkt. No. 110 ) is ADOPTED in its entirety. ORDERED that, because plaintiff failed to provide good cause within fourteen days following the issuance of the Report and Recommendation for his failure to effectuate service upon defendant Santamassino, plaintiff's claims asserted against defendant John Santamassino are DISMISSED without prejudice. ORDERED that defendants' motion for partial summary judgment (Dkt. No. 84 ) is GRANTED IN PART and DENIED IN PART as indicated herein. ORDERED that this matter is deemed trial ready, a trial scheduling order will be issued in due course and Plaintiff's request for counsel (Dkt. No. 115 ) will likewise be considered in due course. Signed by Senior Judge Gary L. Sharpe on 10/26/16. (served on plaintiff by regular mail) (alh, )

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK
________________________________
ROBERT HADEN,
Plaintiff,

9:14-cv-318
(GLS/DEP)

v.
KARL HELLINGER et al.,
Defendants.
________________________________
APPEARANCES:
OF COUNSEL:
FOR THE PLAINTIFF:
Robert Haden
Pro se
#70751
CNY PC
PO Box 300
Marcy, NY 13403
FOR THE DEFENDANTS:
HON. ERIC T. SCHNEIDERMAN
New York State Attorney General
615 Erie Boulevard West, Suite 102
Syracuse, NY 13204-2465

AIMEE PAQUETTE
Assistant Attorney General

Gary L. Sharpe
Senior District Judge
ORDER
The above-captioned matter comes to this court following a Report
and Recommendation by Magistrate Judge David E. Peebles, duly filed on

September 30, 2016. (Dkt. No. 110.) Following fourteen days from the
service thereof, the Clerk has sent the file, including any and all objections
filed by the parties herein.
No objections having been filed,1 and the court having reviewed the
Report and Recommendation for clear error, it is hereby
ORDERED that the Report and Recommendation (Dkt. No. 110) is
ADOPTED in its entirety; and it is further
ORDERED that, because plaintiff failed to provide good cause within
fourteen days following the issuance of the Report and Recommendation
for his failure to effectuate service upon defendant Santamassino, plaintiff’s
claims asserted against defendant John Santamassino are DISMISSED
without prejudice; and it is further
ORDERED that defendants’ motion for partial summary judgment
(Dkt. No. 84) is GRANTED IN PART and DENIED IN PART as follows:
GRANTED as to the following claims, which are DISMISSED:
(1) Plaintiff’s deliberate medical indifference claims
asserted against defendants Kaskiw and Farnum;

1

Plaintiff acknowledges receipt of the Report and Recommendation, yet he filed no
objections. (Dkt. No. 115 ¶ 2.)

2

(2) Plaintiff’s conditions of confinement claims asserted
against all defendants;
(3) All claims asserted against defendants Gonzalez,
Comstock, Piracha, and Kuntz;
(4) Plaintiff’s retaliation claim asserted against defendant
Hellinger; and
(5) Plaintiff’s damage claims asserted against all
defendants sued in their official capacities; and
DENIED in all other respects; and it is further
ORDERED that the following claims remain for trial:
(1) Plaintiff’s excessive force and failure to protect claims
asserted against defendants Hellinger, Pavlot, Morgan, and
Nowicki related to the incident on February 20, 2012, for
damages in their individual capacities, and for injunctive relief
in their individual and official capacities;
(2) Plaintiff’s excessive force, failure to protect, and retaliation
claims asserted against defendants Fical, Searcy, Sill,
Simpkins, Farnum, and Nowicki related to the incident on
August 20, 2012, for damages in their individual capacities, and
3

for injunctive relief in their individual and official capacities;
(3) Plaintiff’s excessive force and failure to protect claims
asserted against defendants Hellinger, Morgan, and Nowicki
related to the incident on August 24, 2012, for damages in their
individual capacities, and for injunctive relief in their individual
and official capacities;
(4) Plaintiff’s excessive force and failure to protect claims
asserted against defendants Box, Paulson, Morgan, and
Nowicki related to the incident on September 22, 2012, for
damages in their individual capacities, and for injunctive relief
in their individual and official capacities;
(5) Plaintiff’s excessive force and failure to protect claims
asserted against defendants Paulson, Bill and Nowicki related
to the incident of June 20, 2013, for damages in their individual
capacities, and for injunctive relief in their individual and official
capacities;
(6) Plaintiff’s deliberate medical indifference claims asserted
against defendants Pavlot and Simpkins for damages in their
individual capacities, and for injunctive relief in their individual
4

and official capacities;
(7) Plaintiff’s retaliation claims asserted against defendants
Searcy, Sill, Fical, and Simpkins related to the incident on
August 20, 2012, for damages in their individual capacities, and
for injunctive relief in their individual and official capacities; and
(8) Plaintiff’s retaliation claim asserted against defendant Box
related to the incident on September 22, 2012, for damages in
his individual capacity, and for injunctive relief in his individual
and official capacity; and it is further
ORDERED that this matter is deemed trial ready, a trial scheduling
order will be issued in due course and Plaintiff’s request for counsel (Dkt.
No. 115) will likewise be considered in due course; and it is further
ORDERED that the clerk of the court serve a copy of this Order upon
the parties in accordance with this court’s Local Rules.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
October 26, 2016
Albany, New York

5