From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Porath v. Bird

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK
Jun 3, 2013
Civil Action No. 9:11-cv-963 (GLS/CFH) (N.D.N.Y. Jun. 3, 2013)

Summary

explaining that cases in the Second Circuit "recognize that intentional, gratuitous uses of force that are not required to subdue an individual likely fail the Graham objective reasonableness test"

Summary of this case from Scalpi v. Amorim

Opinion

Civil Action No. 9:11-cv-963 (GLS/CFH)

06-03-2013

DAVID K. PORATH Plaintiff, v. BIRD, Investigator, NYS Police Defendant.

APPEARANCES: FOR THE PLAINTIFF: DAVID K. PORATH 11-A-2120 Plaintiff Pro Se Sing Sing Correctional Facility 354 Hunter Street Ossining, New York 10562 FOR THE DEFENDANT: HON. ERIC T. SCHNEIDERMAN Attorney General for the State of New York The Capitol Albany, New York 12224-0341 OF COUNSEL: KEVIN P. HICKEY, ESQ. Assistant Attorney General


APPEARANCES:

FOR THE PLAINTIFF:

DAVID K. PORATH
11-A-2120
Plaintiff Pro Se
Sing Sing Correctional Facility
354 Hunter Street
Ossining, New York 10562

FOR THE DEFENDANT:

HON. ERIC T. SCHNEIDERMAN
Attorney General for the

State of New York
The Capitol
Albany, New York 12224-0341 OF COUNSEL: KEVIN P. HICKEY, ESQ.
Assistant Attorney General GARY L. SHARPE, CHIEF JUDGE ORDER

The above-captioned matter comes to this court following a Report-Recommendation by Magistrate Judge Christian F. Hummel, duly filed May 7, 2013. Following ten days from the service thereof, the Clerk has sent the file, including any and all objections filed by the parties herein.

No objections having been filed, and the court having reviewed the Magistrate Judge's Report-Recommendation for clear error, it is hereby

On May 31, 2013, the court received a letter from the plaintiff stating, "At this time, the Plaintiff has no objections at all to the "Report Recommendation and Order," filed on May 7

ORDERED that the Report-Recommendation of Magistrate Judge Christian F. Hummel filed May 7, 2013 is ACCEPTED in its entirety for the reasons state therein; and it is further

ORDERED that Bird's motion for summary judgment (Dkt. No. 46) be DENIED; and it is further

ORDERED, that the Clerk of the Court is to mail copies of the Order to the parties in accordance with the court's local rules. IT IS SO ORDERED. Dated: June 3, 2013

Albany, New York

/s/_________

Gary L. Sharpe

Chief Judge,

U.S. District Court

th 2013." See Dkt. No. 66.


Summaries of

Porath v. Bird

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK
Jun 3, 2013
Civil Action No. 9:11-cv-963 (GLS/CFH) (N.D.N.Y. Jun. 3, 2013)

explaining that cases in the Second Circuit "recognize that intentional, gratuitous uses of force that are not required to subdue an individual likely fail the Graham objective reasonableness test"

Summary of this case from Scalpi v. Amorim

analyzing Fourth Amendment excessive force claim

Summary of this case from Harrell v. Cnty. of Nassau
Case details for

Porath v. Bird

Case Details

Full title:DAVID K. PORATH Plaintiff, v. BIRD, Investigator, NYS Police Defendant.

Court:UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK

Date published: Jun 3, 2013

Citations

Civil Action No. 9:11-cv-963 (GLS/CFH) (N.D.N.Y. Jun. 3, 2013)

Citing Cases

Shuford v. Cardoza

Even assuming plaintiff had pre-existing injuries that defendants aggravated by the use of excessive force,…

Scalpi v. Amorim

endant's "search[] [of] [the plaintiff's] groin area in an uncomfortable manner," in addition to other uses…