Poirier v. Reedy et al, No. 5:2021cv00622 - Document 6 (N.D.N.Y 2021)

Court Description: DECISION AND ORDER: that the Report-Recommendation (Dkt. No. 5 ) is Approved and Adopted in its entirety; that Plaintiff's Complaint (Dkt. No. 1 ) is Dismissed without prejudice; and that the Clerk serve a copy of this Decision and Order on the parties in accordance with the Local Rules. Signed by Senior Judge Lawrence E. Kahn on 07/19/2021. (Copy served upon pro se plaintiff at 753 James Street, Apt. No. 1129, Syracuse, NY 13203 via regular and certified mail on 7/19/2021.)(hmr)

Download PDF
Poirier v. Reedy et al Doc. 6 Case 5:21-cv-00622-LEK-ATB Document 6 Filed 07/19/21 Page 1 of 3 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK KARRIE POIRIER, Plaintiff, 5:21-CV-0622 (LEK/ATB) -againstTIM REEDY, et al., Defendants. DECISION AND ORDER I. INTRODUCTION Pro se plaintiff Karrie Poirier filed a 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action against Tim Reedy, Bishop Nursing Home, Amy Hodgson, and Amy Goldworthy. Dkt. No. 1 (“Complaint”). On June 10, 2021, the Honorable Andrew T. Baxter, United States Magistrate Judge, recommended that Plaintiff’s Complaint be dismissed without prejudice. Dkt. No. 5 (“Report-Recommendation”). For the reasons that follow, the Court adopts the Report-Recommendation in its entirety. II. BACKGROUND The facts are detailed in the Report-Recommendation, familiarity with which is assumed. See R. & R. at 2–4. III. STANDARDS OF REVIEW 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 objections are timely filed, a court “shall make a de novo determination of those portions of the report or specified proposed findings or recommendations to which objection is made.” 28 U.S.C. § 636(b). Dockets.Justia.com Case 5:21-cv-00622-LEK-ATB Document 6 Filed 07/19/21 Page 2 of 3 However, 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 need review that aspect of a report-recommendation only for clear error. Barnes v. Prack, No. 11-CV-857, 2013 WL 1121353, at *1 (N.D.N.Y. Mar. 18, 2013); Farid v. Bouey, 554 F. Supp. 2d 301, 306–07 (N.D.N.Y. 2008), abrogated on other grounds by Widomski v. State Univ. of N.Y. at Orange, 748 F.3d 471 (2d Cir. 2014). “A [district] judge . . . may accept, reject, or modify, in whole or in part, the findings or recommendations made by the magistrate judge.” § 636(b). IV. DISCUSSION Plaintiff did not file objections to the Report-Recommendation. See Docket. Consequently, the Court reviews the Report-Recommendation for clear error and finds none. Therefore, the Court adopts the Report-Recommendation in its entirety. V. CONCLUSION Accordingly, it is hereby: ORDERED, that the Report-Recommendation (Dkt. No. 5) is APPROVED and ADOPTED in its entirety; and it is further ORDERED, that Plaintiff’s Complaint (Dkt. No. 1) is DISMISSED without prejudice; and it is further ORDERED, that the Clerk serve a copy of this Decision and Order on the parties in accordance with the Local Rules. 2 Case 5:21-cv-00622-LEK-ATB Document 6 Filed 07/19/21 Page 3 of 3 IT IS SO ORDERED. DATED: July 19, 2021 Albany, New York LAWRENCE E. KAHN United States District Judge 3

Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.