Elawyers Elawyers
Ohio| Change

Daum v. Racette, 9:15-CV-1083 (DNH/DJS). (2019)

Court: District Court, N.D. New York Number: infdco20190214f80 Visitors: 13
Filed: Feb. 13, 2019
Latest Update: Feb. 13, 2019
Summary: DECISION and ORDER DAVID N. HURD , District Judge . Pro se plaintiff Terry Daum brought this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. 1983. On November 5, 2018, the Honorable Daniel J. Stewart, United States Magistrate Judge, advised by Report-Recommendation that defendants' motion for summary judgment be granted in part and denied in part. Plaintiff timely filed objections to the Report-Recommendation. Based upon a de novo review of the portions of the Report-Recommendation to which p
More

DECISION and ORDER

Pro se plaintiff Terry Daum brought this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. On November 5, 2018, the Honorable Daniel J. Stewart, United States Magistrate Judge, advised by Report-Recommendation that defendants' motion for summary judgment be granted in part and denied in part. Plaintiff timely filed objections to the Report-Recommendation.

Based upon a de novo review of the portions of the Report-Recommendation to which plaintiff objected, the Report-Recommendation is accepted and adopted in all respects. See 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1).

Therefore, it is

ORDERED that

1. Defendants' motion for summary judgment is GRANTED in part and DENIED in part;

2. Defendants' motion for summary judgment is GRANTED as to plaintiff's claims against defendants Bullis, Snow, Brown, and Racette and those defendants are DISMISSED;

3. All claims against the "John Doe" defendants are DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE;

4. Defendants' motion for summary judgment is DENIED in all other respects and the following claims remain for trial: (1) plaintiff's Eighth Amendment claims against defendant Stickney for excessive force, and against defendants Devlin and Cross for failure to intervene; and (2) plaintiff's retaliation claims against defendants Stickney, Devlin, and Cross;

5. Trial in this matter is scheduled for August 6, 2019, in Utica, New York with pre-trial submissions due at noon on or before July 23, 2019; and

6. Plaintiff's previous request for the appointment of pro bono trial counsel is considered renewed and is GRANTED and that assignment will be made.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Source:  Leagle

Can't find what you're looking for?

Post a free question on our public forum.
Ask a Question
Search for lawyers by practice areas.
Find a Lawyer