Opinion

Heuser v. City of Glen Cove

Court
District Court, E.D. New York
Filed
Feb 3, 2025
Cited by
0 cases
Authority
More cited than 33.9%

The opinion

U.S. DISTRICT COURT

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK

EASTERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK LONG ISLAND OFFICE

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------X For Online Publication Only

KRISTINA S. HEUSER,

Plaintiff,

-against- ORDER

21-cv-2018 (JMA) (SIL)

CITY OF GLEN COVE and RICHARD J.

MCCORD,

Defendants.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------X

AZRACK, United States District Judge:

Currently pending before the Court are motions to dismiss filed by Defendants City of Glen

Cove and Richard J. McCord. These motions had previously been referred to Magistrate Judge

Steven I. Locke for a Report and Recommendation. On June 30, 2023, Judge Locke issued a

Report and Recommendation (“R&R”), which recommends that Defendants’ motions be granted,

that the Complaint be dismissed with prejudice, and that Plaintiff be denied leave to amend her

Complaint. (ECF No. 34.)

In reviewing a magistrate judge’s report and recommendation, a court must “make a de

novo determination of those portions of the report or . . . recommendations to which objection[s]

[are] made.” 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C); see also Brown v. Ebert, No. 5-CV-5579, 2006 WL

3851152, at *2 (S.D.N.Y. Dec. 29, 2006). The Court “may accept, reject, or modify, in whole or

in part, the findings or recommendations made by the magistrate judge.” 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C).

Those portions of a report and recommendation to which there is no specific reasoned objection

are reviewed for clear error. See Pall Corp. v. Entegris, Inc., 249 F.R.D. 48, 51 (E.D.N.Y. 2008).

The Court previously adopted the R&R without prejudice because the Court did not have

a record of receiving Plaintiff’s objections to the R&R. Subsequently, Plaintiff filed her objections

along with a screenshot indicating that she had previously submitted her objections electronically.

The Court considers Plaintiff’s objections to have been timely filed and considers those objections

on the merits.

I have undertaken a de novo review of the record, the R&R, Plaintiff’s objections, and

Defendants’ opposition briefs. Plaintiff’s objections are overruled. The Court adopts the R&R,

grants Defendants’ motions to dismiss, denies Plaintiff leave to amend, and dismisses Plaintiff’s

claims with prejudice.

The Clerk of Court is directed to close this case.

SO ORDERED.

Dated: February 3, 2025

Central Islip, New York

/s/ (JMA)

JOAN M. AZRACK

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

This is a copy of a public record, reproduced as it was published. It is not legal advice, and it may not be the version a court would rely on. Check the official source before you cite it.

A word about cookies

We need a few to keep you signed in and the library working. The rest help us see which pages people use and where they get stuck. They stay off unless you say yes.