COLLMAN v. SKOLNIK, 3:10-cv-00090-LRH-WGC. (2012)
Court: District Court, D. Nevada
Number: infdco20120308c20
Visitors: 8
Filed: Mar. 06, 2012
Latest Update: Mar. 06, 2012
Summary: ORDER LARRY R. HICKS, District Judge. Before this Court is the Report and Recommendation of U.S. Magistrate Judge William G. Cobb (#39 1 ) entered on January 26, 2012, recommending granting in part and denying in part Defendants' Motion for Summary Judgment (#29) filed on August 22, 2011. No objection to the Report and Recommendation has been filed. The action was referred to the Magistrate Judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 1B 1-4 of the Rules of Practice of the United
Summary: ORDER LARRY R. HICKS, District Judge. Before this Court is the Report and Recommendation of U.S. Magistrate Judge William G. Cobb (#39 1 ) entered on January 26, 2012, recommending granting in part and denying in part Defendants' Motion for Summary Judgment (#29) filed on August 22, 2011. No objection to the Report and Recommendation has been filed. The action was referred to the Magistrate Judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 1B 1-4 of the Rules of Practice of the United S..
More
ORDER
LARRY R. HICKS, District Judge.
Before this Court is the Report and Recommendation of U.S. Magistrate Judge William G. Cobb (#391) entered on January 26, 2012, recommending granting in part and denying in part Defendants' Motion for Summary Judgment (#29) filed on August 22, 2011. No objection to the Report and Recommendation has been filed. The action was referred to the Magistrate Judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 1B 1-4 of the Rules of Practice of the United States District Court for the District of Nevada.
The Court has conducted its de novo review in this case, has fully considered the pleadings and memoranda of the parties and other relevant matters of record pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636 (b) (1) (B) and Local Rule IB 3-2. The Court determines that the Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendation (#39) entered on January 26, 2012, should be adopted and accepted.
IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that the Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendation (#39) entered on January 26, 2012, is adopted and accepted, and Defendant's Motion for Summary Judgment (#29) is GRANTED in part and DENIED in part as follows:
(1) Summary Judgment is GRANTED as to:
(a) Plaintiff's RLUIPA claim related to clergy visits;
(b) All claims asserted against Defendant Skolnik; and
(c) Plaintiff's official capacity damage claims;
(2) Summary judgment is DENIED as to:
(a) Plaintiff's First Amendment claim related to clergy visits;
(b) Plaintiff's First Amendment claim related to full immersion baptism;
(c) Plaintiff's RLUIPA claim related to full immersion baptism;
(d) Plaintiff's First Amendment claim related to the failure to recognized his faith group; and
(e) Plaintiff's RLUIPA claim related to the failure to recognize his faith group.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
FootNotes
1. Refers to court's docket number.
Source: Leagle