Sevinsky v. County of Cattaraugus
Sevinsky v. County of Cattaraugus
Trial Court Opinion
S STATES DISTRIC UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT ce inet □□□ WESTERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK ~ MAY 1 3 2025 Leap oe” \ □□ ELIZABETH SEVINSKY, RYAN Lesa cents og S BRICKMAN, MICHELLE TIRONE COLADANGELO, and STEPHEN TIRONE, Plaintiff, 24-CV-186 (JLS) (HKS) Vv. COUNTY OF CATTARAUGUS, Defendant.
DECISION AND ORDER Plaintiffs Elizabeth Sevinksky, Ryan Brickman, Michelle Tirone Coladangelo, and Stephen Tirone (collectively, “Plaintiffs”) commenced this action against Defendant County of Cattaraugus, alleging constitutional violations and state law claims. See Dkt. 1, 12. Defendant filed a motion to dismiss. Dkt. 13. Plaintiffs responded (Dkt. 18), and Defendant rephed. Dkt. 21. On April 8, 2025, Judge Schroeder! issued a Report and Recommendation (“R&R”), recommending that this Court grant Defendant's motion to dismiss, only as to Plaintiffs’ fiduciary duty claims, and otherwise deny the motion. See Dkt. 25, at 16. Neither party filed objections.
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. 14.
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 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. § 636(b)(1)(C); Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b)(3). But neither
28 U.S.C. § 636nor 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, and accepts Judge Schroeder's recommendation. For the reasons stated above, and in the R&R, this Court GRANTS Defendant’s [13] motion to dismiss, only as to the fiduciary duty claims, and DENIES the motion in all other respects, as described in the R&R. This case is referred back to Judge Schroeder for further proceedings.
SO ORDERED. Dated: May 138, 2025 4 Buffalo, New York f ii
JOHN E. SINATRA, JR. UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
Reference
- Status
- Unknown