Elawyers Elawyers
Ohio| Change

JOSEPH v. HAMPTON, 2:15-cv-85. (2015)

Court: District Court, S.D. Ohio Number: infdco20150807b60 Visitors: 10
Filed: Aug. 06, 2015
Latest Update: Aug. 06, 2015
Summary: ORDER MICHAEL H. WATSON , District Judge . Magistrate Judge King issued a Report and Recommendation ("R&R") in this pro se prisoner civil rights case recommending that Defendants' motion to dismiss, ECF No. 9, be granted in part and denied in part. R&R, ECF No. 18. Judge King notified the parties of their right to file objections to the R&R pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 636(b)(1) and Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 72(b). Id. at 16. Judge King further specifically advised the parties that t
More

ORDER

Magistrate Judge King issued a Report and Recommendation ("R&R") in this pro se prisoner civil rights case recommending that Defendants' motion to dismiss, ECF No. 9, be granted in part and denied in part. R&R, ECF No. 18.

Judge King notified the parties of their right to file objections to the R&R pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1) and Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 72(b). Id. at 16. Judge King further specifically advised the parties that the failure to object to the R&R within fourteen days would result in a waiver of the right to de novo review by the DistrictJudge as well as a waiver of the right to appeal the decision of the District Court adopting the R&R. Id. The deadline for filing such objections has passed, and no objections were filed.

Having received no objections, the R&R, ECF No. 18, is ADOPTED. The motion to dismiss, ECF No. 9, is hereby GRANTED IN PART and DENIED IN PART. Specifically, the Court DISMISSES all claims against Defendants Timothy Wollenberg and David Freriks. Accordingly, the Clerk shall terminate these Defendants.

Additionally, the Court DISMISSES the conspiracy, dereliction of duty, perjury, and falsification of documents claims against the remaining Defendants, Christie Hampton, Dean Wilson, and Jordan Hollingshead. All other claimsdenial of due process, unlawful detention, denial of access to the courts, and false imprisonment—against these three remaining defendants in their individual capacities remain.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Source:  Leagle

Can't find what you're looking for?

Post a free question on our public forum.
Ask a Question
Search for lawyers by practice areas.
Find a Lawyer