Peele v. Annucci et al
Filing
53
DECISION AND ORDER: ORDERED, that Magistrate Judge Dancks' Report-Recommendation (Dkt. No. 49 ) is ACCEPTED and ADOPTED in its entirety. ORDERED that Defendants' motion for partial summary judgment (Dkt. No. 35 ) is GRANTED as to Plaint iff's claims against Defendant Fletcher, and that Defendant is DISMISSED from this action. ORDERED that Defendants' motion for partial summary judgment (Dkt. No. 35 ) is DENIED as to Plaintiff's claims against Defendants Gordon, Rodi er and Samolis. ORDERED that Pro Bono Counsel be appointed for the Plaintiff for purposes of trial only; any appeal shall remain the responsibility of the plaintiff alone unless a motion for appointment of counsel for an appeal is granted. ORDERE D that upon assignment of Pro Bono Counsel, a pretrial conference with counsel will be scheduled in this action, at which time the Court will schedule a jury trial for Plaintiff's 8th Amendment excessive force claims against Defendants Donah, Sm ith, Gordon and Rodier, and Plaintiff's 8th Amendment failure to intervene and failure to properly train/supervise staff against Defendant Samolis. Counsel are directed to appear at the pretrial conference with settlement authority from the parties. Signed by Chief Judge Glenn T. Suddaby on 8/17/16. (served on plaintiff by regular mail) (alh, )
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK
_____________________________________________
KENNEY PEELE,
Plaintiff,
9:15-CV-0317
(GTS/TWD)
v.
ROBERT M. DONAH, Corr. Officer, Clinton
Corr. Facility; CURTIS E. SMITH, Corr. Officer,
Clinton Corr. Facility; PAUL L. FLETCHER,
Corr. Officer, Clinton Corr. Facility; K. GORDON,
Corr. Officer, Clinton Corr. Facility; C. RODIER,
Corr. Officer, Clinton Corr. Facility; and VINCENT
SAMOLIS, Sergeant, Clinton Corr. Facility,
Defendants.
_____________________________________________
APPEARANCES:
OF COUNSEL:
KENNEY PEELE, 07-B-3122
Plaintiff, Pro Se
Sing Sing Correctional Facility
354 Hunter Street
Ossining, NY 10562
HON. ERIC T. SCHNEIDERMAN
New York State Attorney General
Counsel for Defendants
The Capitol
Albany, NY 12224
TIMOTHY P. MULVEY, ESQ.
Assistant Attorney General
GLENN T. SUDDABY, Chief United States District Judge
DECISION and ORDER
Currently before the Court, in this pro se prisoner civil rights action filed by Kenney
Peele (“Plaintiff”) against the above-captioned employees of the New York State Department of
Corrections and Community Supervision (“Defendants”) at Clinton Correctional Facility in
Dannemora, New York, are Defendants’ motion for partial summary judgment and United States
Magistrate Judge Thérèse Wiley Dancks’ Report-Recommendation recommending that
Defendants’ motion be granted in part and denied in part. (Dkt. Nos. 35, 49.) None of the
parties have filed objections to the Report-Recommendation and the deadline in which to do so
has expired. (See generally Docket Sheet.)
After carefully reviewing the relevant papers herein, including Magistrate Judge Dancks’
thorough Report-Recommendation, the Court can find no clear-error in the ReportRecommendation.1 Magistrate Judge Dancks employed the proper standards, accurately recited
the facts, and reasonably applied the law to those facts. As a result, the Report-Recommendation
is accepted and adopted in its entirety for the reasons set forth therein, and Defendants’ motion is
granted as to Defendant Fletcher and denied as to Defendants Gordon, Rodier, and Samolis
ACCORDINGLY, it is
ORDERED that Magistrate Judge Dancks’ Report-Recommendation (Dkt. No. 49) is
ACCEPTED and ADOPTED in its entirety; and it is further
ORDERED that Defendants’ motion for partial summary judgment (Dkt. No. 35) is
GRANTED as to Plaintiff’s claims against Defendant Fletcher, and that Defendant is
DISMISSED from this action; and it is further
ORDERED that Defendants’ motion for partial summary judgment (Dkt. No. 35) is
DENIED as to Plaintiff’s claims against Defendants Gordon, Rodier and Samolis; and it is
further
1
When no objection is made to a report-recommendation, the Court subjects that
report-recommendation to only a clear error review. Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b), Advisory Committee
Notes: 1983 Addition. When performing such a “clear error” review, “the court need only
satisfy itself that there is no clear error on the face of the record in order to accept the
recommendation.” Id.; see also Batista v. Walker, 94-CV-2826, 1995 WL 453299, at *1
(S.D.N.Y. July 31, 1995) (Sotomayor, J.) (“I am permitted to adopt those sections of [a
magistrate judge’s] report to which no specific objection is made, so long as those sections are
not facially erroneous.”) (internal quotation marks omitted).
2
ORDERED that Pro Bono Counsel be appointed for the Plaintiff for purposes of trial
only; any appeal shall remain the responsibility of the plaintiff alone unless a motion for
appointment of counsel for an appeal is granted; and it is further
ORDERED that upon assignment of Pro Bono Counsel, a pretrial conference with
counsel will be scheduled in this action, at which time the Court will schedule a jury trial for
Plaintiff's 8th Amendment excessive force claims against Defendants Donah, Smith, Gordon and
Rodier, and Plaintiff’s 8th Amendment failure to intervene and failure to properly train/supervise
staff against Defendant Samolis. Counsel are directed to appear at the pretrial conference with
settlement authority from the parties.
Dated: August 17, 2016
Syracuse, New York
____________________________________
HON. GLENN T. SUDDABY
Chief United States District Judge
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?