Chaney v. Trachtenberg et al

Filing 94

DECISION AND ORDER: ORDERED that the Court ACCEPTS the Report-Recommendation (Dkt. No. 92 ) for the reasons stated therein. Defendant D'Agostino's motion for summary judgment (Dkt. No. 64 ) is GRANTED, and the complaint is DISMISSED in its entirety as against defendant D'Agostino. Further, defendant D'Agostino's motion for summary judgment as relates to cross-claims filed by defendants Vena and Bell (Dkt. No. 64 ) is GRANTED, and any such cross-claims are DISMISSED. Signed by Senior Judge Thomas J. McAvoy on 12/28/17. {order served via regular mail and via certified mail on plaintiff}(nas, )

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK
________________________________________
NAKIA CHANEY,
Plaintiff,
v.

9:15-CV-653
(TJM/ATB)

GREGORY M. VENA, et al.,
Defendants
_________________________________________
THOMAS J. McAVOY,
Senior United States District Judge

DECISION & ORDER
I.

INTRODUCTION
This pro se action brought pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 was referred to the Hon.

Andrew T. Baxter, United States Magistrate Judge, for a Report and Recommendation
pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b) and Local Rule 72.3(c). In his Report-Recom mendation
dated November 29, 2017 (Dkt. No. 92), Magistrate Judge Baxter recommends: (1) that
defendant D’Agostino’s motion for summary judgment (Dkt. No. 64) be granted, and the
complaint dismissed in its entirety as against defendant D’Agostino based on a lack of
personal involvement, and (2) that defendant D’Agostino’s motion for summary judgment as
relates to cross-claims filed by defendants Vena and Bell (Dkt. No. 64) be granted, and any
such cross-claims be dismissed. No objections to the Report-Recommendation have been
filed, and the time to do so has expired.

1

II.

DISCUSSION
After examining the record, this Court has determined that the Report-

Recommendation is not subject to attack for plain error or manifest injustice.
III.

CONCLUSION
Accordingly, the Court ACCEPTS the Report-Recommendation (Dkt. No. 92) for the

reasons stated therein. Defendant D’Agostino’s motion for summary judgment (Dkt. No. 64)
is GRANTED, and the complaint is DISMISSED in its entirety as against defendant
D’Agostino. Further, defendant D’Agostino’s motion for summary judgment as relates to
cross-claims filed by defendants Vena and Bell (Dkt. No. 64) is GRANTED, and any such
cross-claims are DISMISSED.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated:December 28, 2017

2