Hirsch v. Mathews et al
MEMORANDUM OPINION - The Court finds no misstatements of law in the reports and no plain error in the magistrate judges description of the relevant facts. Therefore, the Court accepts the magistrate judges recommendation that the Court (1) enter judg ment in favor of Officer Tracy Luna and Officer Terry Johnson with respect to Mr. Hirschs Fourth Amendment claims and state law claims for false arrest and false imprisonment (Doc. 130) and (2) dismiss the balance of Mr. Hirschs claims against the defendants (Doc. 129). The Court denies Mr. Hirshs motions to amend his complaint again (Docs. 100-102) because another amendment to the complaint would be futile. Signed by Judge Madeline Hughes Haikala on 10/16/2017. (KEK)
2017 Oct-16 AM 09:50
U.S. DISTRICT COURT
N.D. OF ALABAMA
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ALABAMA
WILLIAM MATHEWS, et al.,
Case No.: 5:10-cv-00134-MHH-HNJ
On May 31, 2017, the magistrate judge then assigned to this case entered reports
and recommendations concerning Mr. Hirsch’s claims in this 28 U.S.C. § 1983 action.
(Doc. 129; Doc. 130).1 The magistrate judge advised the parties of their right to file
written objections within fourteen days. (Doc. 129, pp. 36-37; Doc. 130, pp. 20-21). No
party has filed objections to the magistrate judge’s reports and recommendations.2
Magistrate Judge Davis issued the reports that are pending before the Court. After Judge
Davis retired, the Clerk assigned this case to Magistrate Judge Johnson. (Doc. 131).
The Clerk mailed a copy of each report and recommendation to pro se plaintiff Arthur Hirsch at
his last known address. (See May 31, 2017 staff note). In addition, when the Clerk reassigned
this case to Magistrate Judge Johnson after Magistrate Judge Davis retired, the Clerk mailed a
copy of the reassignment notice to Mr. Hirsch at his last known address. (See June 7, 2017 staff
note). The copies of the reports and recommendations have been returned to the Court as has the
notice of reassignment. The envelopes indicate that mail could not be delivered as addressed.
(See June 12, 2017 staff entry; June 30, 2017 staff entry). To date, Mr. Hirsch has not provided
the Court with an updated address. It is his obligation to do so.
A district court “may accept, reject, or modify, in whole or part, the findings or
recommendations made by the magistrate judge.” 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C). A district
court reviews legal conclusions in a report de novo and reviews for plain error factual
findings to which no objection is made. Garvey v. Vaughn, 993 F.2d 776, 779 n.9 (11th
Cir. 1993); see also LoConte v. Dugger, 847 F.2d 745, 749 (11th Cir. 1988); Macort v.
Prem, Inc., 208 Fed. Appx. 781, 784 (11th Cir. 2006).
The Court finds no misstatements of law in the reports and no plain error in the
magistrate judge’s description of the relevant facts. Therefore, the Court accepts the
magistrate judge’s recommendation that the Court (1) enter judgment in favor of Officer
Tracy Luna and Officer Terry Johnson with respect to Mr. Hirsch’s Fourth Amendment
claims and state law claims for false arrest and false imprisonment (Doc. 130) and (2)
dismiss the balance of Mr. Hirsch’s claims against the defendants (Doc. 129). The Court
denies Mr. Hirsh’s motions to amend his complaint again (Docs. 100-102) because
another amendment to the complaint would be futile.
The Court will enter a separate final order consistent with this memorandum
opinion. The Court directs the Clerk to please mail a copy of this memorandum opinion
to Mr. Hirsch at his address of record.
DONE and ORDERED this October 16, 2017.
MADELINE HUGHES HAIKALA
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
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?