Filing 37

ORDER ON 36 REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION: Adopting R&R. Defendants' first 32 Motion to Dismiss is GRANTED. Defendants' second 34 Motion to Dismiss is GRANTED. Plaintiff's 15 Amended Complaint is DISMISSED for f ailure to exhaust administrative remedies pursuant to 42 U.S.C.§1997(e) and for failure to state a claim upon which relief may be granted pursuant to 28 U.S.C.§1915(e)(2)(B)(ii). Signed by CHIEF JUDGE M CASEY RODGERS on 11/3/2011. (jws)

Download PDF
Page 1 of 1 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA TALLAHASSEE DIVISION MITZI LEIGH CROW, Plaintiff, v. CASE NO. 4:10cv357-MP-WCS WILLIAM TAYLOR, et al., Defendants. _____________________________/ ORDER This cause comes on for consideration upon the magistrate judge's Report and Recommendation. (Doc. 36). 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 by the parties, 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. 2. Defendants’ first motion to dismiss (doc. 32) is DENIED. 3. Defendants’ second motion to dismiss (doc. 34) is GRANTED. 4. Plaintiff's amended complaint (doc. 15) is DISMISSED for failure to exhaust administrative remedies pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1997(e) and for failure to state a claim upon which relief may be granted pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B)(ii). DONE and ORDERED this 3rd day of November, 2011. s/ M. Casey Rodgers M. CASEY RODGERS CHIEF 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?