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.

Cummings v. Clinton County Legislature

United States District Court, N.D. New York

October 16, 2014

ERVIN CUMMINGS, Plaintiff,
v.
CLINTON COUNTY LEGISLATURE, et al., Defendants.

ORDER

LAWRENCE E. KAHN, District Judge.

This matter comes before the Court following a Report-Recommendation filed on August 13, 2014, by the Honorable Therèse Wiley Dancks, U.S. Magistrate Judge, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b) and Local Rule 72.3(c). Dkt. No. 12 ("Report-Recommendation").

Within fourteen days after a party has been served with a copy of a magistrate judge's reportrecommendation, the party "may serve and file specific, written objections to the proposed findings and recommendations." FED. R. CIV. P. 72(b); L.R. 72.1(c). If no objections are made, or if an objection is general, conclusory, perfunctory, or a mere reiteration of an argument made to the magistrate judge, a district court need review that aspect of a report-recommendation only for clear error. Chylinski v. Bank of Am., N.A., 434 F.Appx. 47, 48 (2d Cir. 2011); Barnes v. Prack, No. 11-CV-0857, 2013 WL 1121353, at *1 (N.D.N.Y. Mar. 18, 2013); Farid v. Bouey, 554 F.Supp.2d 301, 306-07 & n.2 (N.D.N.Y. 2008); see also Machicote v. Ercole, No. 06 Civ. 13320, 2011 WL 3809920, at *2 (S.D.N.Y. Aug. 25, 2011) ("[E]ven a pro se party's objections to a Report and Recommendation must be specific and clearly aimed at particular findings in the magistrate's proposal, such that no party be allowed a second bite at the apple by simply relitigating a prior argument.").

No objections were filed in the allotted time period. See Docket. Accordingly, the Court has reviewed the Report-Recommendation for clear error. Having found none, the Report-Recommendation is approved and adopted in its entirety.

Accordingly, it is hereby:

ORDERED, that the Report-Recommendation (Dkt. No. 12) is APPROVED and ADOPTED in its entirety; and it is further

ORDERED, that Plaintiff's Application to proceed in forma pauperis (Dkt. No. 8) is GRANTED; and it is further

ORDERED, that Plaintiff's claims against Defendants Clinton County Legislature; Dave Fauro; and Larry Bedard are DISMISSED with leave to amend. If Plaintiff wishes to proceed with these claims, he must file, within thirty (30) days of the filing date of this Order, an amended complaint that remedies the deficiencies identified in the Report-Recommendation;[1] and it is further

ORDERED, that Plaintiff's claims against Defendants Commission of Corrections; Clinton County Sheriff's Department; and Clinton County Jail are DISMISSED without leave to amend; and it is further

ORDERED, that the Clerk of the Court serve a copy of this Order on the parties to this action in accordance with the Local Rules.

IT IS SO ORDERED.


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.