Scott v. Swearengin (MAG+)(LEAD CASE)

Filing 60

ORDERED as follows: (1) Mr. Scott's 59 objection is overruled; (2) the 57 Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge is adopted; (3) the decision of the Department of Education arbitration panel is affirmed; (4) Mr. Scott's federal claims a re dismissed with prejudice; and (5) the court declines to exercise supplemental jurisdiction over Mr. Scott's state law claims pursuant to 28 USC 1367 and, thus, these claims are dismissed without prejudice. An appropriate judgment will be entered. Signed by Honorable William Keith Watkins on 10/30/08. (sl, )

Download PDF
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT F O R THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF ALABAMA N O R T H E R N DIVISION C A L V IN SCOTT, SR., ) ) P l a in tif f , ) ) v. ) ) J A M E S (BUDDY) SWEARENGIN, JR., et al., ) ) D e f e n d a n ts . ) _______________________________________ C A L V IN SCOTT, SR., P l a in tif f , v. R A Y DENNIS, et al., D e f e n d a n ts . ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ORDER O n October 17, 2008, the Magistrate Judge filed a Recommendation in the aboves tyle d cases. (Doc. # 57.) Plaintiff Calvin Scott ("Mr. Scott") filed an objection to the R e c o m m e n d a tio n on October 29, 2008. (Doc. # 59.) Upon an independent and de novo re v ie w of those portions of the Recommendation to which objection is made, 28 U.S.C. 636(b)(1)(C), it is ORDERED as follows: 1. 2. 3. M r. Scott's objection (Doc. # 59) is OVERRULED; th e Recommendation (Doc. # 57) is ADOPTED; th e decision of the Department of Education arbitration panel is AFFIRMED; CASE NO. 2:05-CV-651-WKW (WO) C A S E NO. 2:05-CV-652-WKW (WO) 4. 5. M r. Scott's federal claims are DISMISSED with prejudice; and th e court declines to exercise supplemental jurisdiction over Mr. Scott's state la w claims pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 1367 and, thus, these claims are DISMISSED without p r e ju d ic e . A n appropriate judgment will be entered. D O N E this 30th day of October, 2008. /s/ W. Keith Watkins UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 2

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.


Why Is My Information Online?