From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Ramos v. Artuz

United States District Court, S.D. New York
Jul 19, 2001
00 Civ. 0149 (LTS)(HBP) (S.D.N.Y. Jul. 19, 2001)

Opinion

00 Civ. 0149 (LTS)(HBP)

July 19, 2001.



The Court has reviewed Magistrate Judge Pitman's Report and Recommendation dated March 2, 2001 (the "Report") which recommends that the Court grant in part and deny in part defendants' motion to dismiss the complaint. There have been no objections made to the Report.

In reviewing a report and recommendation the Court "may accept, reject, or modify, in whole or in part, the findings or recommendations made by the magistrate." 28 U.S.C. § 636 (b)(1)(C). The Court reviews the magistrate judge's findings under the "clearly erroneous or contrary to law" standard when no objections have been made by either party.United States v. Wilson, 864 F.2d 1219, 1221 (5th Cir. 1989) (court is required to conduct review de novo only to portions of the magistrate's recommendation to which a party has objected); St. Louis v. McClellan, No. 91-C4343, 1993 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 8850, at *3 (S.D.N.Y. June 30, 1993) (court adopts portions of report that are not "clearly erroneous").

Magistrate Judge Pitman's thoughtful and thorough opinion appropriately determines the motion. The Court has reviewed carefully the Report and has found no clear error. The Court adopts the Report and Recommendation for the reasons stated therein. Accordingly, defendants' motion to dismiss is granted in part and denied in part, as set forth in the following Report and Recommendation.

IT IS SO ORDERED.


Summaries of

Ramos v. Artuz

United States District Court, S.D. New York
Jul 19, 2001
00 Civ. 0149 (LTS)(HBP) (S.D.N.Y. Jul. 19, 2001)
Case details for

Ramos v. Artuz

Case Details

Full title:HECTOR RAMOS, Plaintiff, v. CHRISTOPHER ARTUZ, Superintendent, LARRY…

Court:United States District Court, S.D. New York

Date published: Jul 19, 2001

Citations

00 Civ. 0149 (LTS)(HBP) (S.D.N.Y. Jul. 19, 2001)

Citing Cases

Joyner v. Greiner

ght most favorable to him, defendants did not not argue that plaintiff had failed to plead an objectively…

Rivera v. Pataki

However, "personal involvement will be found . . . where a supervisory official receives and acts on a…