Brown v. Summit County Sheriff Department et al

Filing 80

ORDER ADOPTING 78 RECOMMENDATION OF MAGISTRATE JUDGE AND GRANTING 43 DEFENDANTS' MOTION TO DISMISS. Plaintiff's Amended Complaint is hereby dismissed with prejudice. Each party shall pay her or his own attorney's fees and costs. By Judge William J. Martinez on 12/2/2014.(alowe)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO
Judge William J. Martínez
Civil Action No. 14-cv-0032-WJM-BNB
D. BROWN,
Plaintiff,
v.
DEPUTY JEFF WILSON,
DETECTIVE JARED DENNIS,
DEPUTY CORNELL,
SHERIFF JOHN MINOR, and
OTHER DEPUTIES UNKNOWN NAMES TO ENTER AT A LATER DATE,
Defendant.
______________________________________________________________________
ORDER ADOPTING NOVEMBER 5, 2014 RECOMMENDATION OF MAGISTRATE
JUDGE AND GRANTING DEFENDANTS’ MOTION TO DISMISS
______________________________________________________________________
This matter is before the Court on the November 5, 2014 Recommendation of
United States Magistrate Judge Boyd N. Boland (the “Recommendation”) (ECF No. 78)
that Defendants Detective Jared Dennis, Deputy Cornell, and Sheriff John Minor’s
Motion to Dismiss (ECF No. 43) be denied. The Recommendation is incorporated herein
by reference. See 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B); Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b).
The Recommendation advised the parties that specific written objections were
due within fourteen days after being served with a copy of the Recommendation. (ECF
No. 78, at 9 n.3.) Despite this advisement, no objections to the Magistrate Judge’s
Recommendation have to date been received.
The Court concludes that the Magistrate Judge’s analysis was thorough and
sound, and that there is no clear error on the face of the record. See Fed. R. Civ. P.

72(b) advisory committee’s note (“When no timely objection is filed, the court need only
satisfy itself that there is no clear error on the face of the record in order to accept the
recommendation.”); see also Summers v. Utah, 927 F.2d 1165, 1167 (10th Cir. 1991)
(“In the absence of timely objection, the district court may review a magistrate’s report
under any standard it deems appropriate.”).
In accordance with the foregoing, the Court ORDERS as follows:
(1)

The Magistrate Judge’s Recommendation (ECF No. 78) is ADOPTED in its
entirety;

(2)

Defendants Jared Dennis, Deputy Cornell, and Sheriff John Minor’s Motion to
Dismiss (ECF No. 43) is GRANTED; and

(3)

Plaintiff’s Amended Complaint (ECF No. 11) is hereby DISMISSED WITH
PREJUDICE. Each party shall pay her or his own attorney’s fees and costs.
Dated this 2nd day of December, 2014.
BY THE COURT:

_________________________
William J. Martínez
United States District Judge

2