From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Rodgers v. Gumbus

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK
May 27, 2021
9:19-CV-419 (N.D.N.Y. May. 27, 2021)

Opinion

9:19-CV-419

05-27-2021

PRINCE RODGERS, Plaintiff, v. DEBRA GUMBUS et al., Defendants.

APPEARANCES: PRINCE RODGERS Plaintiff, Pro Se 43756 Westchester County Jail P.O. Box 10 Valhalla, NY 10595 HON. LETITIA JAMES New York State Attorney General Attorneys for Defendants The Capitol Albany, NY 12224 MARK G. MITCHELL, ESQ. Ass't Attorney General



APPEARANCES:

OF COUNSEL:

PRINCE RODGERSPlaintiff, Pro Se43756Westchester County JailP.O. Box 10Valhalla, NY 10595

HON. LETITIA JAMESNew York State Attorney GeneralAttorneys for DefendantsThe CapitolAlbany, NY 12224

MARK G. MITCHELL, ESQ.Ass't Attorney General

DAVID N. HURD United States District Judge ORDER ADOPTING REPORT & RECOMMENDATION

On April 8, 2019, pro se plaintiff Prince Rodgers ("plaintiff") filed this action alleging that defendants violated his constitutional rights by suspending his law library privileges while he was incarcerated at Franklin Correctional Facility. Dkt. No. 1. Several claims and defendants were dismissed on initial review, Dkt. No. 7, and other claims and parties were dismissed pre-answer for lack of subject matter jurisdiction and failure to state a claim for relief, Dkt. No. 31.

Thereafter, the parties conducted discovery into plaintiff's (1) First Amendment access-to-courts claims against defendants Gumbus, LaClair, Foster, and King; and (2) First Amendment retaliation claims against Gumbus and LaClair. Defendants moved for summary judgment on these claims on November 20, 2020. Dkt. No. 40.

On May 10, 2021, U.S. Magistrate Judge Andrew T. Baxter advised by Report & Recommendation that defendants' motion for summary judgment be granted and that plaintiff's complaint be dismissed. Dkt. No. 49. Plaintiff has not filed an objection, and the time period in which to do so has expired. See id.

Upon review for clear error, the Report & Recommendation is accepted and adopted in all respects. See FED. R. CIV. P. 72(b).

Therefore, it is

ORDERED that

1. The Report & Recommendation (Dkt. No. 49) is accepted and adopted;

2. Defendants' motion for summary judgment (Dkt. No. 40) is GRANTED; and

3. Plaintiff's complaint is DISMISSED.

The Clerk of the Court is directed to enter a judgment accordingly and close the file.

IT IS SO ORDERED. Dated: May 27, 2021

Utica, New York.

/s/_________

David N. Hurd

U.S. District Judge


Summaries of

Rodgers v. Gumbus

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK
May 27, 2021
9:19-CV-419 (N.D.N.Y. May. 27, 2021)
Case details for

Rodgers v. Gumbus

Case Details

Full title:PRINCE RODGERS, Plaintiff, v. DEBRA GUMBUS et al., Defendants.

Court:UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK

Date published: May 27, 2021

Citations

9:19-CV-419 (N.D.N.Y. May. 27, 2021)

Citing Cases

Gunn v. Bentivegna

To satisfy the final prong of a First Amendment retaliation claim, “temporal proximity alone is not enough to…