MAGWOOD v. CREWS et al
Filing
35
ORDER ACCEPTING 31 REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION - The motion to dismiss, ECF No. 24 is GRANTED as to all claims and all Defendants with the exception of Plaintiff's Eighth Amendment claim against Defendant Beem and Eighth A mendment claim against Defendant Hawkins. This case is REMANDED to the Magistrate for further proceedings on the two surviving claims. Signed by JUDGE MARK E WALKER on 2/25/2015. (tdl)**CARR, RICHARD COMERFORD, CYNTHIA COURTNEY, COVAN, MICHAEL D CREWS, DENMON, ENFINGER, JACKSON, JOHNSON, LEE, MOORE, MARSHA NICHOLS, SIMS, SUTTLES, THORNHILL, BENCE and BURT terminated.
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA
TALLAHASSEE DIVISION
BOBBY L. MAGWOOD,
Plaintiff,
v.
Case No. 4:14cv314-MW/CAS
OFFICER BEEM, et al.,
Defendants.
___________________________/
ORDER ACCEPTING
REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION
This Court has considered, without hearing, the Magistrate’s Report and
Recommendation, ECF No.31, and has also reviewed de novo Plaintiff’s objections
to the report and recommendation, ECF No. 33. Accordingly
IT IS ORDERED:
The report and recommendation is accepted and adopted over Plaintiff's
objections as this Court’s opinion. The motion to dismiss, ECF No. 24 is
GRANTED as to all claims and all Defendants with the exception of Plaintiff's
Eighth Amendment claim against Defendant Beem and Eighth Amendment claim
against Defendant Hawkins; that the claims proceed against the Defendants in their
individual capacities only; that Plaintiff's request for declaratory and injunctive
relief be stricken as moot due to his transfer; and that the request for damages be
1
limited to nominal damages pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1997(e). This case is
REMANDED to the Magistrate for further proceedings on the two surviving
claims.
SO ORDERED on February 25, 2015.
s/Mark E. Walker
United States District Judge
2
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?