From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Goodwin v. Kennedy

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK
Mar 10, 2015
13-CV-1774 (SJF)(AKT) (E.D.N.Y. Mar. 10, 2015)
Download
PDF
Check
Treatment

Summary

holding that multiple cuts and lacerations did not satisfy the objective element

Summary of this case from Morehouse v. Vasquez
See 8 Summaries

Opinion

13-CV-1774 (SJF)(AKT)

03-10-2015

SEAN LARRY GOODWIN, Plaintiffs, v. SUFFOLK COUNTY POLICE DEPARTMENT P.O. THOMAS KENNEDY #5620, SUFFOLK COUNTY POLICE DEPARTMENT DETECTIVE JAMES J. DEMARCO #1397, Defendants.

FEUERSTEIN, J.

ORDER

Before the Court is Magistrate Judge A. Kathleen Tomlinson's Report and Recommendation, dated February 6, 2015, recommending that defendants' motion for partial summary judgment be granted and plaintiff's claim of deliberate indifference to a serious medical need be dismissed. [Docket Entry No. 62 (the "Report")]. No objections to the Report have been filed. For the following reasons, the Court adopts the Report in its entirety. I. Standard of Review

Any portion of a report and recommendation on a dispositive matter to which a timely objection has been made is reviewed by the district court de novo. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1); Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b). The Court, however, is not required to review the factual findings or legal conclusions of the magistrate judge as to which no proper objections are interposed. See Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140, 150, 106 S.Ct. 466, 88 L.Ed.2d 435 (1985). To accept the report and recommendation of a magistrate judge on a dispositive matter to which no timely objection has been made, the district judge need only be satisfied that there is no clear error on the face of the record. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b); Johnson v. Goord, 487 F. Supp. 2d 377, 379 (S.D.N.Y. 2007), aff'd, 305 F. App'x 815 (2d Cir. Jan. 9, 2009); Baptichon v. Nev. State Bank, 304 F. Supp. 2d 451, 453 (E.D.N.Y. 2004), aff'd, 125 F. App'x 374 (2d Cir. Apr. 13, 2005). Whether or not proper objections have been filed, the district judge may, after review, accept, reject, or modify any of the magistrate judge's findings or recommendations. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1); Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b). II. Analysis

No objections to Magistrate Judge Tomlinson's Report have been filed and the time to file objections has passed. Upon review, the Court is satisfied that the Report is not facially erroneous. Accordingly, the Court accepts the Report in its entirety. For the reasons set forth in the Report, defendants' motion for partial summary judgment is GRANTED. SO ORDERED.

s/ Sandra J. Feuerstein

Sandra J. Feuerstein

United States District Judge
Dated: March 10, 2015

Central Islip, New York

Summaries of

Goodwin v. Kennedy

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK
Mar 10, 2015
13-CV-1774 (SJF)(AKT) (E.D.N.Y. Mar. 10, 2015)

holding that multiple cuts and lacerations did not satisfy the objective element

Summary of this case from Morehouse v. Vasquez

holding that multiple cuts and lacerations did not satisfy objective element

Summary of this case from Johnson v. Schiff

holding that "a split lip, which bled and became swollen . . . needed stitches" did not constitute serious medical condition

Summary of this case from White v. Rock

noting a “split of authority” amongst the districts, and concluding that “the Due Process Clause provides the proper constitutional grounds for analyzing Plaintiff's denial of medical care claim.”

Summary of this case from Roland v. City of New York

noting that "'[s]ubjective complaints of pain' are not, in and of themselves, sufficient to establish the existence of a serious medical need" (quoting Thomas v. Nassau Cnty. Corr. Ctr., 288 F. Supp. 2d 333, 338 (E.D.N.Y. 2003))

Summary of this case from Lopez v. City of New York

applying the deliberate indifference standard of the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment to arrestees' denial of medical treatment claims

Summary of this case from Griffin-Robinson v. Warhit

explaining that the fact that "[p]laintiff never sought further treatment for his injuries. . . [may] undermine[] the notion that the injuries were 'serious' and tends to show that his injuries were not 'chronic'"

Summary of this case from Youngblood v. City of New York

asserting that courts in the Eastern District of New York "generally apply the 'deliberate indifference' standard of the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment ... to claims that law enforcement officials denied medical treatment to arrestees held in state custody"

Summary of this case from Shakir v. Derby Police Dep't
Case details for

Goodwin v. Kennedy

Case Details

Full title:SEAN LARRY GOODWIN, Plaintiffs, v. SUFFOLK COUNTY POLICE DEPARTMENT P.O…

Court:UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK

Date published: Mar 10, 2015

Citations

13-CV-1774 (SJF)(AKT) (E.D.N.Y. Mar. 10, 2015)

Citing Cases

Youngblood v. City of New York

It is in fact "settled Second Circuit doctrine . . . that chronic pain arising from serious hand injuries…

You v. City of N.Y.

The plaintiff's other injuries - abrasions to his face and hands - were not sufficiently serious to satisfy…

25 Citing Cases