HARRY v. NICHOLS et al
Filing
47
ORDER ADOPTING 45 REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION. Defendants' motion to dismiss the amended complaint (doc. 35 ) is GRANTED IN PART and DENIED IN PART. Plaintiff's medical malpractice claim against defendants Corizon, Nich ols, and Brady is DISMISSED. This matter is referred to the assigned Magistrate Judge for further proceedings on plaintiff's Eighth Amendment claim against defendants Nichols and Brady. Signed by JUDGE M CASEY RODGERS on 9/20/2018. (sdw)
Page 1 of 2
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA
PENSACOLA DIVISION
NAIL A. HARRY,
Plaintiff,
v.
CASE NO. 3:17cv328-MCR-CJK
M. NICHOLS, et al.,
Defendants.
___________________________/
ORDER
This cause comes on for consideration upon the Magistrate Judge’s Report
and Recommendation dated August 22, 2018. ECF No. 45. The parties have been
furnished a copy of the Report and Recommendation and have been afforded an
opportunity to file objections pursuant to Title 28, United States Code, Section
636(b)(1). I have made a de novo determination of any timely filed objections.
Having considered the Report and Recommendation, and any objections
thereto timely filed, I have determined that the Report and Recommendation should
be adopted.
Accordingly, it is now ORDERED as follows:
1.
The Magistrate Judge’s Report and Recommendation is adopted and
incorporated by reference in this Order.
Page 2 of 2
2.
Defendants’ motion to dismiss the amended complaint (doc. 35) is
GRANTED IN PART and DENIED IN PART.
2.
Plaintiff’s medical malpractice claim against defendants Corizon,
Nichols, and Brady is DISMISSED.
3.
This matter is referred to the assigned Magistrate Judge for further
proceedings on plaintiff’s Eighth Amendment claim against defendants Nichols and
Brady.
DONE AND ORDERED this 20th day of September 2018.
M. Casey Rodgers
s/
M. CASEY RODGERS
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
Case No. 3:17cv328-MCR-CJK
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?