Williams v. Artus et al
Filing
66
DECISION AND ORDER: Plaintiff's appeal 62 of Magistrate Judge Leslie G. Foschio's Decision and Order 60 is denied. The case is referred back to Magistrate Judge Foschio for further proceedings. SO ORDERED. Signed by Hon. Richard J. Arcara on 5/12/17. (LAS)
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
WESTERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK
DANIEL WILLIAMS,
Plaintiff,
DECISION AND ORDER
13-CV-680
v.
E. MENDEZ, Correctional Sergeant,
EDWARD J. MEYER, Correctional Captain,
D. FERRON, Correctional Guard,
GARROW, Correctional Guard,
BARAN, Correctional Guard
WINAGLE, Registered Nurse,
D. POKIGO, Correctional Guard,
H. OBERTEAN, Physician Assistant,
Defendants.
This case was referred to Magistrate Judge Leslie G. Foschio pursuant to 28
U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B). On April 18, 2017, Magistrate Judge Foschio filed a Decision
and Order (Dkt. No. 60) granting in part and denying in part plaintiff’s motion for in
camera review (Dkt. No. 52) and granting Defendants’ request for sealing (Dkt. No. 56).
The plaintiff has appealed Judge Foschio’s Decision and Order. Dkt. No. 62.
A magistrate judge’s non-dispositive orders, such as those at issue here, “may
[be] reconsider[ed] . . . where it has been shown that the . . . order is clearly erroneous
or contrary to law.” 28 U.S.C. §636(b)(1)(A). See also Sealed Plaintiff No. 1 v. Sealed
Defendant No. 1, 221 F.R.D. 367, 368 (N.D.N.Y. 2004) (“Magistrate judges are given
broad discretion with respect to discovery disputes which should not be overruled
absent a showing of clear abuse of discretion.”) Upon such review, and after reviewing
the submissions from the parties, the Court affirms Judge Foschio’s Order.
The case is referred back to Magistrate Judge Foschio for further proceedings.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
____Richard J. Arcara____________
HONORABLE RICHARD J. ARCARA
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
Dated: May 12, 2017
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?