Filed: Nov. 04, 2019
Latest Update: Nov. 04, 2019
Summary: ORDER D.P. MARSHALL, JR. , District Judge . 1. Motion to reconsider, N o 85, denied. Magistrate Volpe didn't clearly err or misapply the law in allowing Defendants an opportunity to respond to Flemons's newly sworn material. 2. On de novo review, the Court adopts Magistrate Judge Volpe's recommendation and supplemental recommendation, N o 75 & N o 84, and overrules Flemons's objections, N o 78-79 & N o 88. FED. R. CIV. P. 72(b)(3). The conditions Flemons
Summary: ORDER D.P. MARSHALL, JR. , District Judge . 1. Motion to reconsider, N o 85, denied. Magistrate Volpe didn't clearly err or misapply the law in allowing Defendants an opportunity to respond to Flemons's newly sworn material. 2. On de novo review, the Court adopts Magistrate Judge Volpe's recommendation and supplemental recommendation, N o 75 & N o 84, and overrules Flemons's objections, N o 78-79 & N o 88. FED. R. CIV. P. 72(b)(3). The conditions Flemons e..
More
ORDER
D.P. MARSHALL, JR., District Judge.
1. Motion to reconsider, No 85, denied. Magistrate Volpe didn't clearly err or misapply the law in allowing Defendants an opportunity to respond to Flemons's newly sworn material.
2. On de novo review, the Court adopts Magistrate Judge Volpe's recommendation and supplemental recommendation, No 75 & No 84, and overrules Flemons's objections, No 78-79 & No 88. FED. R. CIV. P. 72(b)(3). The conditions Flemons encountered in punitive isolation—other inmates yelling, bright lights, foul smells, and occasional flooding—are unfortunate. But they don't differ so greatly from conditions in general population that they implicate a liberty interest for due process purposes. Phillips v. Norris, 320 F.3d 844, 847 (8th Cir. 2003); see also Beverati v. Smith, 120 F.3d 500, 503-04 (4th Cir. 1997). And without a showing of deliberate indifference, they don't support a stand-alone Eighth Amendment claim either.
Defendants' motion for summary judgment, No 62, is granted. Flemons's remaining federal claims will be dismissed with prejudice. The Court declines to exercise jurisdiction over Flemons's state law claims; they will be dismissed without prejudice.
So Ordered.
