Koltun v. Berry et al

Filing 224

ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION for 181 Report and Recommendation. Accordingly, the Court ADOPTS the R&R dated April 6, 2016, in full. All claims against Brite and Winslow are DISMISSED, once again, with prejudice. It follows, of course , that since the claims against Winslow have been dismissed, default judgment should not be entered. Accordingly, the Court will not disturb Magistrate Judge Francis's denial of Koltun's motion for default judgment. (As further set forth in this Order), James Winslow (in their individual capacity), James Winslow (in their official capacity), Paul Brite (in their official capacity) and Paul Brite (in their individual capacity) terminated. (Signed by Judge Paul A. Crotty on 7/28/2016) Copies Mailed By Chambers. (lmb)

rusOC suNY

i1

--;_\'

I

DOCUMENT
_
I
\\ELECTRONICALLYFILED
1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK

DOC#: ----~--:-

------------------------------------------------------------)(

I
1

DATE FILED: /- L-8~) ~ }

: 1 . - - - -·-

VICTOR KOLTUN,

Plaintiff,

13 Civ. 1612 (PAC) (JCF)

-against-

ORDER ADOPTING REPORT
AND RECOMMENDATION

JEFFREY BERRY, et al.,

Defendants.

------------------------------------------------------------)(
HONORABLE PAUL A. CROTTY, United States District Judge:
Plaintiff Victor Koltun claims that his constitutional rights were violated in the course of
his arrest and prosecution for murder. He seeks damages under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. In his original
complaint, Koltun asserted claims against two attorneys who had represented him, Paul Brite and
James Winslow. Brite and Winslow moved to dismiss, and Magistrate Judge James C. Francis
IV issued a report and recommendation (R&R) dated July 19,2013, recommending that their
motions be granted with prejudice. The Court adopted the R&R in full. Koltun then filed what he
styled a "Second Amended Complaint" in which he reasserted his claims against Brite and
Winslow verbatim. In an R&R dated April6, 2016, Magistrate Judge Francis recommended that
the Court dismiss those claims. Koltun objected and then moved for a default judgment against
Winslow. Magistrate Judge Francis denied the motion, citing his April 6 R&R. Koltun then
objected to the denial of his motion for default judgment.
This Court dismissed Koltun's claims against Brite and Winslow with prejudice. In his
objection, Koltun provides no factual or legal basis justifying his disregard for that order. Nor
does he provide any grounds upon which the Court should reject or modify the R&R.

1

_!

Accordingly, the Court ADOPTS the R&R dated April 6, 2016, in full. All claims against Brite
and Winslow are DISMISSED, once again, with prejudice. It follows, of course, that since the
claims against Winslow have been dismissed, default judgment should not be entered.
Accordingly, the Court will not disturb Magistrate Judge Francis's denial ofKoltun' s motion for
default judgment.

Dated: New York, New York
July 28, 2016

SO ORDERED

~TTY

United States District Judge

Copy Mailed by Chambers To:
Victor Koltun
Walsh R.M.U. - 14A1241
P.O. Box 8451
Rome, NY 13442

2