Deep v. Clinton Central School District

Full title: NORMAN P. DEEP, JR., Plaintiff, v. CLINTON CENTRAL SCHOOL DISTRICT…

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

Date published: Aug 13, 2009

6:07-CV-1144 (N.D.N.Y. Aug. 13, 2009)

Opinion

6:07-CV-1144.

August 13, 2009

AJ BOSMAN, ESQ., Attorney for Plaintiff, Rome, New York.

HERBERT J. CULLY, ESQ., CALLI CALLI CULLY, Attorneys for Plaintiff, Utica, New York.

NORMAN P. DEEP, ESQ., Attorney for Plaintiff, Sherrill, New York.

IMAN ABRAHAM, ESQ., CHARLES E. SYMONS, ESQ., FRANK W. MILLER, ESQ., Attorney for Defendants, East Syracuse, New York.

ORDER

DAVID HURD, District Judge

The remaining defendants have made a second motion for summary judgment pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 56 to plaintiff's First Amendment Retaliation Claim. (Docket No. 45). Plaintiff opposes and cross-moves for summary judgment. (Docket Nos. 48, 49, 50, 51, and 52). Defendants filed a reply. (Docket No. 54).

Upon a review of the submissions and in each case reviewing the evidence most favorable to the non-moving party (plaintiff in the second motion and defendants in the cross-motion), questions of material fact exist as to all relevant issues pertaining to plaintiff's retaliation claim.

Therefore, it is

ORDERED that

1. Defendant's second motion is DENIED; and

2. Plaintiff's cross-motion is DENIED.

IT IS SO ORDERED.