From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Wager v. Greene Cnty.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK
Feb 9, 2016
1:15-CV-1487 (LEK/CFH) (N.D.N.Y. Feb. 9, 2016)

Opinion

1:15-CV-1487 (LEK/CFH)

02-09-2016

DOUGLAS C. WAGER, Plaintiff, v. GREENE COUNTY, Defendant.


ORDER

This matter comes before the Court following a Report-Recommendation filed on January 6, 2015, by the Honorable Christian F. Hummel, U.S. Magistrate Judge, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b) and Local Rule 72.3. Dkt. No. 4 ("Report-Recommendation").

Within fourteen days after a party has been served with a copy of a magistrate judge's report-recommendation, the party "may serve and file specific written objections to the proposed findings and recommendations." FED. R. CIV. P. 72(b); L.R. 72.1(c). If no objections are made, or if an objection is general, conclusory, perfunctory, or a mere reiteration of an argument made to the magistrate judge, a district court must review that aspect of a report-recommendation only for clear error. Barnes v. Prack, No. 11-CV-0857, 2013 WL 1121353, at *1 (N.D.N.Y. Mar. 18, 2013); Farid v. Bouey, 554 F. Supp. 2d 301, 306-07 & n.2 (N.D.N.Y. 2008); see also Machicote v. Ercole, No. 06 Civ. 13320, 2011 WL 3809920, at *2 (S.D.N.Y. Aug. 25, 2011) ("[E]ven a pro se party's objections to a Report and Recommendation must be specific and clearly aimed at particular findings in the magistrate's proposal, such that no party be allowed a second bite at the apple by simply relitigating a prior argument."). "A [district] judge . . . may accept, reject, or modify, in whole or in part, the findings or recommendations made by the magistrate judge." 28 U.S.C. § 636(b).

No objections were filed in the allotted time period. See Docket. Accordingly, the Court has reviewed the Report-Recommendation for clear error and has found none.

Accordingly, it is hereby:

ORDERED, that the Report-Recommendation (Dkt. No. 4) is APPROVED and ADOPTED in its entirety; and it is further

ORDERED, that Plaintiff's Motion (Dkt. No. 2) for leave to proceed in forma pauperis is GRANTED; and it is further

ORDERED, that Plaintiff's Complaint (Dkt. No. 1) is DISMISSED without prejudice and with opportunity to amend; and it is further

ORDERED, that if Plaintiff wishes to proceed with this action, he is instructed to file an Amended Complaint within thirty (30) days of the issuance of this Order; and it is further

ORDERED, that the Court serve a copy of this Order on the parties in accordance with the Local Rules.

IT IS SO ORDERED. DATED: February 09, 2016

Albany, New York

/s/_________

Lawrence E. Kahn

U.S. District Judge


Summaries of

Wager v. Greene Cnty.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK
Feb 9, 2016
1:15-CV-1487 (LEK/CFH) (N.D.N.Y. Feb. 9, 2016)
Case details for

Wager v. Greene Cnty.

Case Details

Full title:DOUGLAS C. WAGER, Plaintiff, v. GREENE COUNTY, Defendant.

Court:UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK

Date published: Feb 9, 2016

Citations

1:15-CV-1487 (LEK/CFH) (N.D.N.Y. Feb. 9, 2016)