Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

WRIGHT v. DIXON

United States District Court, W.D. New York


June 23, 2005.

DEAN WRIGHT, Plaintiff,
v.
T. DIXON, et al., Defendants.

The opinion of the court was delivered by: DAVID LARIMER, Chief Judge, District

DECISION AND ORDER

Plaintiff, Dean Wright, has moved for summary judgment in this pro se civil rights action. Plaintiff's motion is denied. Defendants have only recently answered the complaint, which was filed in February of this year, and there has been no discovery. To grant plaintiff's motion, the Court would have to assume the truth of plaintiff's allegations in the complaint, which the Court cannot properly do. See Cadbury Beverages, Inc. v. Cott Corp., 73 F.3d 474, 481 (2d Cir. 1996) (improper for district court to draw inferences in favor of moving party when deciding motion for summary judgment); Gemological Institute of America, Inc. v. Zarian Co., Ltd., 349 F.Supp.2d 692, 695 (S.D.N.Y. 2004) (noting that "a pre-discovery motion [for summary judgment] should be viewed with significant caution").

Plaintiff's motion for summary judgment (Dkt. #8) is denied.

  IT IS SO ORDERED.

20050623

© 1992-2005 VersusLaw Inc.



Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.