Walton v. Merrett et al

Filing 14

ORDER adopting 12 Report and Recommendations and overruling 13 Plaintiff's Objections to the Report. Instructions to the Clerk of the Court. See Order for Details. Signed by Judge Marcia Morales Howard on 1/8/2025. (EJK)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA
JACKSONVILLE DIVISION
ANGELA M. WALTON,
Plaintiff,
v.

Case No. 3:24-cv-581-MMH-PDB

THE HONORABLE JOHN
MERRETT, et al.,
Defendants.
ORDER
THIS CAUSE is before the Court on the Report and Recommendation
(Doc. 12; Report), entered by the Honorable Patricia Barksdale, United States
Magistrate Judge, on October 28, 2024. In the Report, Judge Barksdale
recommends that the federal claims in Plaintiff, Angela Walton’s, 42 U.S.C.
§ 1983 Civil Rights Complaint (Doc. 1) be dismissed, that the Court decline to
exercise supplemental jurisdiction over any state-law claims, and that the case
be closed. See Report at 40. 1 On November 18, 2024, Walton filed objections to
the

Report.

See

Plaintiff’s

Objections

to

Magistrate’s

Report

and

Recommendation (Doc. 13; Objections).

Before issuing the Report, the Magistrate Judge granted Walton’s application to
proceed without prepaying fees or costs. See Order (Doc. 11), entered on October 25, 2024.
1

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).
Under Rule 72, Federal Rules of Civil Procedure (Rule(s)), the Court “must
determine de novo any part of the magistrate judge’s disposition that has been
properly objected to.” Rule 72(b)(3); see also 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). However, a
party waives the right to challenge on appeal any unobjected-to factual and
legal conclusions. See 11th Cir. R. 3-1. 2 As such, the Court reviews those
portions of the Magistrate Judge’s findings to which no objection was filed for
plain error and only if necessary, in the interests of justice. See id.; see also
Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140, 150 (1985) (“It does not appear that Congress
intended to require district court review of a magistrate [judge’s] factual or legal
conclusions, under a de novo or any other standard, when neither party objects
to those findings.”); Dupree v. Warden, 715 F.3d 1295, 1304–05 (11th Cir. 2013)
(recommending the adoption of what would become 11th Circuit Rule 3-1 so
that district courts do not have “to spend significant amounts of time and
resources reviewing every issue—whether objected to or not”). Upon
independent review of the file and for the reasons stated in Judge Barksdale’s

2 The Magistrate Judge properly informed the parties of the time period for objecting

and the consequences of failing to do so. See Report at 40–41.
-2-

Report, the Court will overrule the Objections and accept and adopt the legal
and factual conclusions recommended by the Magistrate Judge.
In the Objections, Walton expresses her dissatisfaction with the Report.
See Objections at 4. However, she identifies no legal or factual error in the
Magistrate Judge’s determination that she lacks standing to bring claims on
behalf of her son or the analysis of the merits of Walton’s federal claims. See
generally id. Indeed, Walton does not even object to the Magistrate Judge’s
recommendation that the federal claims be dismissed or the determination that
any attempt by Walton to amend those claims would be futile. See generally id.
Instead, Walton focuses her argument on the contention that her claims under
the Florida Wrongful Death Act should survive dismissal. See generally id. But
the Magistrate Judge did not reach the merits of her state-law claims and
simply recommended the Court decline to exercise supplemental jurisdiction
over those claims and, as such, that they be dismissed without prejudice. See
generally Report. There is no error in the Magistrate Judge’s recommendation
that the Court decline to exercise supplemental jurisdiction over the state-law
claims.

-3-

Accordingly, it is hereby
ORDERED:
1.

Plaintiff,

Angela

Walton’s,

Objections

to

the

Report

and

Recommendation (Doc. 13) are OVERRULED.
2.

The Magistrate Judge’s Report and Recommendation (Doc. 12) is
ADOPTED as the opinion of the Court.

3.

To the extent Walton brings claims for her son’s injuries, those
claims are DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE.

4.

To the extent Walton brings claims seeking declaratory or
injunctive relief, those claims are DISMISSED WITHOUT
PREJUDICE.

5.

In all other respects, Walton’s federal claims against Defendants in
their official and individual capacities are DISMISSED WITH
PREJUDICE.

6.

Walton’s state-law claims against Defendants are DISMISSED
WITHOUT PREJUDICE.

7.

The Clerk of the Court is directed to enter JUDGMENT in favor of
John Merrett, Diidre Wells, Ms. Trudeau, and Robert Davis, and
against Angela Walton.

-4-

8.

The Clerk of the Court is further DIRECTED to terminate all
deadlines and motions as moot and close the file.

DONE AND ORDERED in Jacksonville, Florida this 8th day of
January, 2025.

lc33
Copies to:
Pro Se Party
Counsel of Record

-5-