McDougal v. Orkies, 17-CV-469-SMY-RJD. (2019)
Court: District Court, S.D. Illinois
Number: infdco20190715801
Visitors: 7
Filed: Jul. 12, 2019
Latest Update: Jul. 12, 2019
Summary: MEMORANDUM AND ORDER STACI M. YANDLE , District Judge . This matter is before the Court on the Report and Recommendation ("Report") of United States Magistrate Judge Reona J. Daly (Doc. 70) recommending that Defendants Larson and Gerst's Motions for Summary Judgment (Doc. 55) be granted. No objections to the Report have been filed. For the following reasons, Judge Daly's Report and Recommendation is ADOPTED. When neither timely nor specific objections to a Report and Recommendation are
Summary: MEMORANDUM AND ORDER STACI M. YANDLE , District Judge . This matter is before the Court on the Report and Recommendation ("Report") of United States Magistrate Judge Reona J. Daly (Doc. 70) recommending that Defendants Larson and Gerst's Motions for Summary Judgment (Doc. 55) be granted. No objections to the Report have been filed. For the following reasons, Judge Daly's Report and Recommendation is ADOPTED. When neither timely nor specific objections to a Report and Recommendation are m..
More
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
STACI M. YANDLE, District Judge.
This matter is before the Court on the Report and Recommendation ("Report") of United States Magistrate Judge Reona J. Daly (Doc. 70) recommending that Defendants Larson and Gerst's Motions for Summary Judgment (Doc. 55) be granted. No objections to the Report have been filed. For the following reasons, Judge Daly's Report and Recommendation is ADOPTED.
When neither timely nor specific objections to a Report and Recommendation are made, the Court need not conduct a de novo. See Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140 (1985). Instead, the Court reviews the Report for clear error. Johnson v. Zema Systems Corp., 170 F.3d 734, 739 (7th Cir. 1999). The Court may "accept, reject, or modify, in whole or in part, the findings or recommendations made by the magistrate judge." 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1).
Here, Judge Daly thoroughly discussed and supported her conclusion that Defendants Larson and Gerst are entitled to summary judgment on Plaintiff's Eighth Amendment deliberate indifference claim (Count 1). The Court finds no clear error in Judge Daly's findings, analysis, or conclusions, and adopts her Report and Recommendation in its entirety. Accordingly, Defendants Larson and Gerst's Motion for Summary Judgment (Doc. 55) is GRANTED. Judgment shall be entered.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Source: Leagle
