From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Storms v. Harriman

United States District Court, N.D. New York
Aug 4, 2009
9:05-CV-1115 (N.D.N.Y. Aug. 4, 2009)

Opinion

9:05-CV-1115.

August 4, 2009

NATHANIEL STORMS, Plaintiff, pro se, 02-A-1689, Attica Correctional Facility, Attica, NY.

DEAN K. HIGGINS, ESQ., C. HARRIS DAGUE, ESQ., Assts. Attorney General, HON. ANDREW M. CUOMO, Attorney General of the State of New York, Attorney for State Defendants, Department of Law, The Capitol, Albany, New York.


DECISION and ORDER


Plaintiff, Nathaniel Storms, brought this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. By Report-Recommendation dated March 31, 2009, the Honorable David E. Peebles, United States Magistrate Judge, recommended that defendants' motion for summary judgment (Docket No. 56) be granted and that plaintiff's amended complaint be dismissed in its entirety. The plaintiff has timely filed lengthy objections to the report-recommendation.

Based upon a careful review of the entire file and the recommendations of Magistrate Judge Peebles, the Report-Recommendation is accepted and adopted in all respects.See 28 U.S.C. 636(b)(1).

Accordingly, it is

ORDERED that

1. Defendants' motion for summary judgment is GRANTED;

2. The amended complaint is DISMISSED;

3. The Clerk is directed to enter judgment accordingly and close the file.

IT IS SO ORDERED.


Summaries of

Storms v. Harriman

United States District Court, N.D. New York
Aug 4, 2009
9:05-CV-1115 (N.D.N.Y. Aug. 4, 2009)
Case details for

Storms v. Harriman

Case Details

Full title:NATHANIEL STORMS, Plaintiff, v. PAUL HARRIMAN, R.N.; T. BROUSSEAU, Inmate…

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

Date published: Aug 4, 2009

Citations

9:05-CV-1115 (N.D.N.Y. Aug. 4, 2009)

Citing Cases

Thousand v. Wrest

Plaintiff contends that Obertean's response was improper because he had already unsuccessfully made such a…

Sheffield v. Cook

In any event, such an argument would be unpersuasive as refusal to obey an officer's directive does not…