VELEZ v. OWENS, V614-074. (2014)
Court: District Court, S.D. Georgia
Number: infdco20141202a30
Visitors: 16
Filed: Dec. 01, 2014
Latest Update: Dec. 01, 2014
Summary: ORDER B. AVANT EDENFIELD, District Judge. After an independent and de novo review of the entire record, the undersigned concurs with the Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendation, to which Plaintiff filed Objections. In his Objections, Plaintiff contends that his claims against Defendant Owens, the Commissioner of the Georgia Department of Corrections, should not be dismissed because Defendant Owens is the final policymaker, and he instituted a custom or policy which resulted in a violat
Summary: ORDER B. AVANT EDENFIELD, District Judge. After an independent and de novo review of the entire record, the undersigned concurs with the Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendation, to which Plaintiff filed Objections. In his Objections, Plaintiff contends that his claims against Defendant Owens, the Commissioner of the Georgia Department of Corrections, should not be dismissed because Defendant Owens is the final policymaker, and he instituted a custom or policy which resulted in a violati..
More
ORDER
B. AVANT EDENFIELD, District Judge.
After an independent and de novo review of the entire record, the undersigned concurs with the Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendation, to which Plaintiff filed Objections. In his Objections, Plaintiff contends that his claims against Defendant Owens, the Commissioner of the Georgia Department of Corrections, should not be dismissed because Defendant Owens is the final policymaker, and he instituted a custom or policy which resulted in a violation of Plaintiff's constitutional rights.
Plaintiff fails to establish what custom or policy Owens instituted which led to the alleged violations of Plaintiff's constitutional rights. Plaintiff only makes conclusory allegations in this regard, which are an insufficient basis for liability under 42 U.S.C. § 1983.
Plaintiff's Objections are overruled. The Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendation is adopted as the opinion of the Court. Plaintiff's claims against Defendant Owens are DISMISSED. Plaintiff is reminded to advise the Court of the identities of the John/Jane Doe Defendants, the names of the dorm corrections officers on duty May 16, 2012, and an address for service for Defendant Williams within thirty (30) days of this Order. Plaintiff's failure to do so will result in the dismissal of these Defendants from this cause of action
SO ORDERED.
Source: Leagle
