Evans v. Griffin et al

Filing 17

ORDER adopting Magistrate Judge Hugh B. Scott's Report and Recommendation as filed on August 5, 2014. The plaintiff's motion for default judgment is denied. The parties shall comply with the pretrial proceedings dates as established in Judge Scott's Report and Recommendation 14 . The case is referred back to Magistrate Judge Scott for further proceedings. IT IS SO ORDERED. Signed by Hon. Richard J. Arcara on 9/8/14. (LAS)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
WESTERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK

SHAWN EVANS,
Plaintiff,
v.

ORDER
12-CV–365

OFFICER P. MURPHY, et al.,
Defendants.

The above-referenced case was referred to Magistrate Judge Hugh B.
Scott, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §636(b)(1)(B). Plaintiff filed a motion for a temporary
restraining order (Dkt. No. 49) and defendants filed a motion for summary
judgment (Dkt. No. 56). On February 11, 2014, Magistrate Judge Scott issued a
Report and Recommendation recommending the following: (1) that plaintiff’s
motion for a temporary restraining order be denied; (2) that defendants’ motion
for summary judgment with respect to plaintiff’s December 31, 2011 claims be
granted; (3) that defendants’ motion for summary judgment with respect to
plaintiff’s January 13, 2012 claims against defendants Rozell and Reppert be
denied; (4) that defendants’ motion for summary judgment with respect to
plaintiff’s failure to intervene claims be granted; (5) that defendants’ motion for
summary judgment with respect to plaintiff’s retaliation claims be granted; and (6)
that defendants’ motion for summary judgment based upon qualified immunity be
denied. (Dkt. No. 75)

Plaintiff filed objections to the Report and Recommendation on February
26, 2014. (Dkt. No. 76) Defendants filed a response on March 5, 2014 (Dkt. No.
77), and the Court considered the matter submitted without oral argument.
Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §636(b)(1), this Court must make a de novo
determination of those portions of the Report and Recommendation to which
objections have been made. Upon de novo review, and after reviewing the
submissions of the parties, the Court adopts the proposed findings of the Report
and Recommendation.
Accordingly, for the reasons set forth in Magistrate Judge Scott’s Report
and Recommendation, plaintiff’s motion for a temporary restraining order is
denied, and defendants’ motion for summary judgment is granted in part and
denied in part, as set forth in detail in the Report and Recommendation.
The matter is referred back to Magistrate Judge Scott for further
proceedings.

SO ORDERED.

Richard J. Arcara
HONORABLE RICHARD J. ARCARA
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
Dated: March 12, 2014

2

3