Romano v. Levitt et al, No. 1:2015cv00518 - Document 60 (W.D.N.Y. 2017)
Court Description: DECISION AND ORDER adopting Magistrate Judge Hugh B. Scott's Report and Recommendation 54 . To the extent that plaintiff's motion 44 is construed as seeking injunctive relief, the motion is denied. The case is recommitted to Magistrate Judge Scott consistent with the original referral order. SO ORDERED. Signed by Hon. Richard J. Arcara on 6/9/17. (LAS)
Download PDF
<![CDATA[
Romano v. Levitt et al Doc. 60 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK ANTHONY ROMANO, Plaintiff, DECISION AND ORDER 15-CV-518A v. DOCTOR LEVITT, DOCTOR S. LEUTHE, Defendants. This case was referred to Magistrate Judge Hugh B. Scott, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B). On May 5, 2017, Magistrate Judge Scott filed a Report and Recommendation (Dkt. No. 54), recommending that, to the extent plaintiff’s motion should be construed as one seeking injunctive relief, the motion (Dkt. No. 44) should be denied. The Court has carefully reviewed the Report and Recommendation, the record in this case, and the pleadings and materials submitted by the parties, and no objections having been timely filed, it is hereby ORDERED, that pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1), and for the reasons set forth in Magistrate Judge Scott’s Report and Recommendation, that to the extent plaintiff’s motion seeks an injunction, that motion is denied. This case is recommitted to Magistrate Judge Scott consistent with the original referral order (Dkt. No. 30). Dockets.Justia.com IT IS SO ORDERED. ____Richard J. Arcara____________ HONORABLE RICHARD J. ARCARA UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT Dated: June 9, 2017
]]>
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.
