Opinion
1:21-cv-674 (BKS/DJS)
07-30-2021
URSULA MANGIR and ENES MANGIR, Plaintiffs, v. ELIZABETH MARIE WALSH, Defendant.
Plaintiffs Pro Se: Ursula Mangir Rensselear, NY 12144 Enes Mangir Rensselaer, NY 12144
Plaintiffs Pro Se: Ursula Mangir Rensselear, NY 12144
Enes Mangir Rensselaer, NY 12144
MEMORANDUM-DECISION AND ORDER
HON. BRENDA K. SANNES, UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
Plaintiffs pro se Ursula Mangir and Enes Mangir filed this action under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 alleging that the rulings and actions of Defendant Judge Elizabeth Marie Walsh in court proceedings violated the Constitution. (Dkt. No. 1). This case was referred to United States Magistrate Judge Daniel J. Stewart who, on June 24, 2021, issued a Report-Recommendation recommending that Plaintiffs' complaint be dismissed with prejudice because Judge Walsh has absolute immunity from personal liability for actions taken in the performance of her official duties. (Dkt. No. 8, at 2-3). Magistrate Judge Stewart advised Plaintiffs that under 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1), they had fourteen days within which to file written objections to the Report, and that the failure to object to the report within fourteen days would preclude appellate review. (Dkt. No. 8, at 3). No objections were filed.
As no objections have been filed, and the time for filing objections has expired, the Court reviews the Report-Recommendation for clear error. See Petersen v. Astrue, 2 F.Supp.3d 223, 228-29 (N.D.N.Y. 2012); Fed.R.Civ.P. 72(b) advisory committee's note to 1983 amendment. Having reviewed the Report-Recommendation for clear error and found none, the Court adopts the Report-Recommendation in its entirety.
For these reasons, it is hereby
ORDERED that Magistrate Judge Stewart's Report-Recommendation (Dkt. No. 8) is ADOPTED in all respects; and it is further
ORDERED that Plaintiffs' complaint is DISMISSED with prejudice; and it is further
ORDERED that the Clerk serve a copy of this Order on the Plaintiffs in accordance with the Local Rules.
IT IS SO ORDERED.