Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change

Richards v. McKee, 12-14148. (2016)

Court: District Court, E.D. Michigan Number: infdco20160427d16 Visitors: 5
Filed: Apr. 26, 2016
Latest Update: Apr. 26, 2016
Summary: ORDER ADOPTING 4/6/16 REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION SEAN F. COX , District Judge . Plaintiff Kyle Richards filed this pro se civil rights action against fifty Defendants on September 19, 2012, alleging violations of 42 U.S.C. 1983 and state law. As of September of 2015, the only remaining claims were Plaintiff's claims against Scott Campau, a Correctional Deputy at the Macomb County Jail, and Defendant Harold Warr, an officer at the Michigan Department of Correction's Bellamy Creek Correc
More

ORDER ADOPTING 4/6/16 REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION

Plaintiff Kyle Richards filed this pro se civil rights action against fifty Defendants on September 19, 2012, alleging violations of 42 U.S.C. § 1983 and state law.

As of September of 2015, the only remaining claims were Plaintiff's claims against Scott Campau, a Correctional Deputy at the Macomb County Jail, and Defendant Harold Warr, an officer at the Michigan Department of Correction's Bellamy Creek Correctional Facility.

On September 17, 2015, Defendant Warr filed a Motion for Summary Judgment, which was referred to Magistrate Judge Mona Majzoub for a Report and Recommendation pursuant to § 636(b)(1).

In a Report and Recommendation ("R&R") issued on April 6, 2016, Magistrate Majzoub recommends that Defendant Warr's Motion for Summary Judgment be granted and that Defendant Warr be dismissed from this action.

Pursuant to FED. R. CIV. P. 72(b), a party objecting to the recommended disposition of a matter by a Magistrate Judge must filed objections to the R&R within fourteen (14) days after being served with a copy of the R&R. "The district judge to whom the case is assigned shall make a de novo determination upon the record, or after additional evidence, of any portion of the magistrate judge's disposition to which specific written objection has been made." Id.

The time for filing objections to the R&R has expired and the docket reflects that neither party has filed objections to the R&R. The Court hereby ADOPTS the April 6, 2016 R&R.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Defendant Warr's Motion for Summary Judgment is GRANTED and Defendant Warr is DISMISSED from this action.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Source:  Leagle

Can't find what you're looking for?

Post a free question on our public forum.
Ask a Question
Search for lawyers by practice areas.
Find a Lawyer