Filed: Mar. 29, 2019
Latest Update: Mar. 29, 2019
Summary: ORDER MICHAEL J. DAVIS , District Judge . The above-entitled matter comes before the Court upon the Report and Recommendation of United States Magistrate Judge David T. Schultz dated February 28, 2019. Defendants filed objections to the Report and Recommendation. Pursuant to statute, the Court has conducted a de novo review upon the record. 28 U.S.C. 636(b)(1); Local Rule 72.2(b). Based upon that review, the Court ADOPTS the Report and Recommendation of United States Magistrate Judge
Summary: ORDER MICHAEL J. DAVIS , District Judge . The above-entitled matter comes before the Court upon the Report and Recommendation of United States Magistrate Judge David T. Schultz dated February 28, 2019. Defendants filed objections to the Report and Recommendation. Pursuant to statute, the Court has conducted a de novo review upon the record. 28 U.S.C. 636(b)(1); Local Rule 72.2(b). Based upon that review, the Court ADOPTS the Report and Recommendation of United States Magistrate Judge ..
More
ORDER
MICHAEL J. DAVIS, District Judge.
The above-entitled matter comes before the Court upon the Report and Recommendation of United States Magistrate Judge David T. Schultz dated February 28, 2019. Defendants filed objections to the Report and Recommendation.
Pursuant to statute, the Court has conducted a de novo review upon the record. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1); Local Rule 72.2(b). Based upon that review, the Court ADOPTS the Report and Recommendation of United States Magistrate Judge Schultz dated February 28, 2019.
Accordingly, based upon the files, records, and proceedings herein, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED:
1. The Court ADOPTS the Report and Recommendation of United States Magistrate Judge David T. Schultz dated February 28, 2019 [Docket No. 67].
2. Defendants' Partial Motion to Dismiss [Docket No. 33] is GRANTED IN PART AND DENIED IN PART.
3. Plaintiff's Eighth Amendment excessive force claim against Defendants Katie Defiel and David Rieshus is DISMISSED.
4. Plaintiff's Fourteenth Amendment due process claims are DISMISSED.
5. Plaintiff's Eighth Amendment medical care claim is DISMISSED.
6. Plaintiff's Minnesota tort law claim for negligence is DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE.
