From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Davis-Wright v. Union Supply Direct Inc.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK
Feb 4, 2013
8:12-CV-1780 (N.D.N.Y. Feb. 4, 2013)

Opinion

8:12-CV-1780

02-04-2013

MARK DAVIS-WRIGHT, Plaintiff, v. UNION SUPPLY DIRECT INC., Defendant.

APPEARANCES: MARK DAVIS-WRIGHT Upstate Correctional Facility


APPEARANCES:

MARK DAVIS-WRIGHT
Upstate Correctional Facility

OF COUNSEL:

NORMAN A. MORDUE, U. S. DISTRICT JUDGE

ORDER

The above matter comes to me following a Report-Recommendation by Magistrate Judge Randolph F. Treece, duly filed on the 11th day of January 2013. Following fourteen (14) days from the service thereof, the Clerk has sent me the file, including any and all objections filed by the parties herein.

After careful review of all of the papers herein, including the Magistrate Judge's Report-Recommendation, and no objections submitted thereto, it is

ORDERED that:

1. The Report-Recommendation is hereby adopted in its entirety.

2. The entire complaint is dismissed pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §1915(e)(2)(B)(ii) for failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted and for lack of subject matter jurisdiction.

3. The Clerk of the Court shall serve a copy of this Order upon all parties and the Magistrate Judge assigned to this case. Plaintiff shall be served by certified mail, return receipt requested.

IT IS SO ORDERED. Dated: February 4, 2013

Syracuse, New York

____________________________

Honorable Norman A. Mordue

U.S. District Judge


Summaries of

Davis-Wright v. Union Supply Direct Inc.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK
Feb 4, 2013
8:12-CV-1780 (N.D.N.Y. Feb. 4, 2013)
Case details for

Davis-Wright v. Union Supply Direct Inc.

Case Details

Full title:MARK DAVIS-WRIGHT, Plaintiff, v. UNION SUPPLY DIRECT INC., Defendant.

Court:UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK

Date published: Feb 4, 2013

Citations

8:12-CV-1780 (N.D.N.Y. Feb. 4, 2013)

Citing Cases

Diaz v. Johnson

Although his state law claim does not implicate federal question jurisdiction, the Court has subject matter…