Boomer v. Goord, et al
ORDER denying plaintiff's 58 Motion for Summary Judgment. Signed by Hon. David G. Larimer on 1/12/10. (EMA)
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK _______________________________________________ SOLOMON BOOMER,
Plaintiff, DECISION AND ORDER 03-CV-6348L v. JOSE DEPERIO, STEPHEN LASKOWSKI, ROBERT M. TAKOS, LESTER N. WRIGHT, M.D.,
Plaintiff's motion for summary judgment (Dkt. #58) is denied. In deciding that motion, the Court must viewing the factual record in this case in the light most favorable to the non-moving parties, i.e., the defendants, and draw all reasonable inferences in their favor. Leibowitz v. Cornell University, 584 F.3d 487, 498 (2d Cir. 2009). Applying that standard here, it would clearly be impossible to grant summary judgment for plaintiff without resolving disputed issues of fact, which the Court may not do on a motion for summary judgment. See Goldberg & Connolly v. New York Community Bancorp, Inc., 565 F.3d 66, 71 (2d Cir. 2009).
Plaintiff's motion for summary judgment (Dkt. #58) is denied. IT IS SO ORDERED.
_______________________________________ DAVID G. LARIMER United States District Judge
Dated: Rochester, New York January 12, 2010.
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?