From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Crawford v. Craig

United States District Court, N.D. New York
Sep 17, 2008
9:06-CV-521 (N.D.N.Y. Sep. 17, 2008)

Opinion

9:06-CV-521.

September 17, 2008

CARL CRAWFORD, Plaintiff, Pro Se, 57110-066, FCI Ray Brook, Ray Brook, NY.

WILLIAM H. PEASE, ESQ., Assistant U.S. Attorney, HON. ANDREW T. BAXTER, Acting United States Attorney for the Northern District of New York, Syracuse, New York.


DECISION and ORDER


Plaintiff, Carl Crawford, brought this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. By Report-Recommendation dated August 21, 2008, the Honorable Randolph F. Treece, United States Magistrate Judge, recommended that the defendants' motion for summary judgment (Docket No. 28) be granted, and the plaintiff's complaint (Docket No. 1) be dismissed. The plaintiff has not filed any objections to the Report-Recommendation.

Based upon a careful review of the entire file and the recommendations of Magistrate Judge Treece, 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 plaintiff's complaint is DISMISSED; and

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

IT IS SO ORDERED.


Summaries of

Crawford v. Craig

United States District Court, N.D. New York
Sep 17, 2008
9:06-CV-521 (N.D.N.Y. Sep. 17, 2008)
Case details for

Crawford v. Craig

Case Details

Full title:CARL CRAWFORD, Plaintiff, v. T.R.CRAIG; EVELYN MILLER; DR. DAWN MARINI; S…

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

Date published: Sep 17, 2008

Citations

9:06-CV-521 (N.D.N.Y. Sep. 17, 2008)

Citing Cases

Fredericks v. Doe

Similarly, the fact that Plaintiff has not had a physical examination or "blood work" done during his time in…