AMICUS AI
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Docket Number
Attorney(S)
Judges
Are you a practicing lawyer?
Enhance your digital presence and reach by creating a Casemine profile.
Upload pleading to use the new AI search
Cites
Cited by
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Docket Number
Attorney(S)
Judges

DIMAS CUADRADO, Plaintiff, v. BRUEAULT, Correction Officer, Coxsackie Correctional Facility, Defendant.

DAVID N. HURD United States District Judge

APPEARANCES: DIMAS CUADRADO
13-A-3993
Plaintiff, pro se
Great Meadow Correctional Facility
Box 51
Comstock, NY 12821
HON. ERIC T. SCHNEIDERMAN
Attorney General for the State of New York
Attorney for Defendant
Litigation Bureau
The Capitol
Albany, NY 12224
RACHEL M. KISH, ESQ.
Ass't Attorney General
DAVID N. HURD United States District Judge













DECISION and ORDER

Pro se plaintiff Dimas Cuadrado brought this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. On March 17, 2015, the Honorable Christian F. Hummel, United States Magistrate Judge, advised by Report-Recommendation that defendant's motion to dismiss pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6) be granted. Plaintiff timely filed objections to the Report-Recommendation.

Based upon a de novo review of the portions of the Report-Recommendation to which plaintiff objected, the Report-Recommendation is accepted and adopted in all respects. See 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1).

Therefore, it is

ORDERED that

1. Defendant Brueault's motion to dismiss is GRANTED;

2. To the extent plaintiff asserts claims against defendant Brueault in his official capacity, those claims are DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE;

3. All remaining claims are DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE based on plaintiff's failure to fully exhaust administrative remedies;

4. The Central Office Review Committee ("CORC") is directed to render a decision on plaintiff's pending grievance within thirty days of the date of this Decision and Order, that is, by May 8, 2015;

5. If plaintiff does not receive a decision from the CORC by May 8, 2015, administrative remedies may be deemed unavailable to him and he may therefore be excused from exhausting;

6. In the event plaintiff does not receive a decision from the CORC by May 8, 2015, he may refile this suit indicating such;

7. In the event plaintiff does receive a decision from the CORC by Mail 8, 2015, he may refile this suit indicating such; and

8. The Clerk is directed to serve a copy of this Decision and Order upon the parties in accordance with the Local Rules.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

/s/_________


United States District Judge
Dated: April 8, 2015


Utica, New York.


Use AI to get other relevant cases.

Comments

Cuadrado v. Brueault
(Apr 8, 2015)