Weber v. Town of LeRoy

W.D. New York

Weber v. Town of LeRoy

DecidedFebruary 18, 2025

Docket1:23-cv-00499

StatusUnknown

This text of Weber v. Town of LeRoy (Weber v. Town of LeRoy) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court, W.D. New York primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Weber v. Town of LeRoy, (W.D.N.Y. 2025).

Pincite

Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT Crise WESTERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK FEB 1 § 2025 Lap ee STEVEN WEBER,

Plaintiff, V. 23-CV-499 (JLS) (HKS) TOWN OF LEROY, Defendant.

DECISION AND ORDER Plaintiff Steven Weber initiated this action—alleging civil rights claims and claims arising from Defendant’s tortious acts. See Dkt. 1. On September 22, 2023, Defendant moved to dismiss. Dit. 5. Plaintiff responded in opposition (Dkt. 7), and Defendant replied. Dkt. 8. On May 1, 2024, Judge Schroeder! issued a Report, Recommendation, and Order (“R&R”), recommending that this Court deny Defendant’s motion to dismiss. Dkt. 9, at 20.2 On May 14, 2024, Defendant objected to the R&R. Dkt. 15. Plaintiff responded (Dkt. 24), and Defendant replied. Dkt. 25, 26. A district court may accept, reject, or modify the findings or recommendations of a magistrate judge. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1); Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b)(3). A district

1 This Court referred the case to United States Magistrate Judge H. Kenneth Schroeder, Jr. for all proceedings under 28 U.S.C. §§ 636(b)(1)(A), (B), and (C). Dkt. 6. 2The page numbers refer to the CM/ECF pagination in the header of each page.

court must conduct a de novo review of those portions of a magistrate judge’s recommendation to which a party objects. See 28 U.S.C. § 6386(b)(1)(C); Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b)(8). But neither 28 U.S.C. § 636 nor Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 72 requires a district court to review the recommendation of a magistrate judge to which no objections are raised. See Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140, 149-50 (1985). This Court carefully reviewed the R&R, the objections briefing, and the relevant record. Based on its de novo review, the Court accepts and adopts Judge Schroeder’s recommendation. For the reasons stated above, and in the R&R, this Court DENIES Defendant’s motion to dismiss. The case is referred back to Judge Schroeder for further proceedings consistent with the September 26, 2023 referral order. Dkt. 6.

SO ORDERED. Dated: February 18, 2025 Buffalo, New York a , 7 ~ □

(UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

3 The Court acknowledges that this is in a Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(b)(1) and Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(b)(6) posture.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT Crise WESTERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK FEB 1 § 2025 Lap ee STEVEN WEBER,

Plaintiff, V. 23-CV-499 (JLS) (HKS) TOWN OF LEROY, Defendant.

DECISION AND ORDER Plaintiff Steven Weber initiated this action—alleging civil rights claims and claims arising from Defendant’s tortious acts. See Dkt. 1. On September 22, 2023, Defendant moved to dismiss. Dit. 5. Plaintiff responded in opposition (Dkt. 7), and Defendant replied. Dkt. 8. On May 1, 2024, Judge Schroeder! issued a Report, Recommendation, and Order (“R&R”), recommending that this Court deny Defendant’s motion to dismiss. Dkt. 9, at 20.2 On May 14, 2024, Defendant objected to the R&R. Dkt. 15. Plaintiff responded (Dkt. 24), and Defendant replied. Dkt. 25, 26. A district court may accept, reject, or modify the findings or recommendations of a magistrate judge. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1); Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b)(3). A district

1 This Court referred the case to United States Magistrate Judge H. Kenneth Schroeder, Jr. for all proceedings under 28 U.S.C. §§ 636(b)(1)(A), (B), and (C). Dkt. 6. 2The page numbers refer to the CM/ECF pagination in the header of each page.

court must conduct a de novo review of those portions of a magistrate judge’s recommendation to which a party objects. See 28 U.S.C. § 6386(b)(1)(C); Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b)(8). But neither 28 U.S.C. § 636 nor Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 72 requires a district court to review the recommendation of a magistrate judge to which no objections are raised. See Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140, 149-50 (1985). This Court carefully reviewed the R&R, the objections briefing, and the relevant record. Based on its de novo review, the Court accepts and adopts Judge Schroeder’s recommendation. For the reasons stated above, and in the R&R, this Court DENIES Defendant’s motion to dismiss. The case is referred back to Judge Schroeder for further proceedings consistent with the September 26, 2023 referral order. Dkt. 6.

SO ORDERED. Dated: February 18, 2025 Buffalo, New York a , 7 ~ □

(UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

3 The Court acknowledges that this is in a Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(b)(1) and Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(b)(6) posture.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

Weber v. Town of LeRoy, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/weber-v-town-of-leroy-nywd-2025.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack