HETRICK v. MCNEIL

Filing 124

ORDER ON REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION; ADOPTING 122 , 123 FOURTH and FIFTH REPORTs AND RECOMMENDATION; GRANTING 95 Motion for Summary Judgment - treated as a motion to dismiss; GRANTING 111 First MOTION for Summary Judgment. Si gned by CHIEF JUDGE STEPHAN P MICKLE on 3/15/2011. Plaintiffs claims against Defendant Engram are dismissed for failure to exhaust administrative remedies. The clerk shall enter judgment for Defendants Salvador and Solorzano-Pallais on all claims. (kdm)

Download PDF
Page 1 of 2 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA PANAMA CITY DIVISION DWAN HETRICK, Plaintiff, v. ESPIDIDO M. SALVADOR, et al., Defendants. _____________________________/ CASE NO. 5:08cv272-SPM/WCS ORDER THIS CAUSE comes before the Court for consideration of the Magistrate Judge's Fourth and Fifth Report and Recommendation (docs. 122 and 123) dated January 25, 2011 and January 26, 2011. Plaintiff has been given an opportunity to file objections. No objections have been filed. I have determined that the Reports and Recommendations should be adopted. Accordingly, it is ORDERED AND ADJUDGED: 1. The Magistrate Judge's Fourth and Fifth Report and Recommendation (docs.122 and 123) are ADOPTED and incorporated by reference in this order. 2. Defendant Engram's motion for summary judgment (doc. 95) is Page 2 of 2 treated as a motion to dismiss and granted. Plaintiff's claims against Defendant Engram are dismissed for failure to exhaust administrative remedies. 3. The motion for summary judgment (doc. 111) filed by Defendants Salvador and Solorzano-Pallais is granted. The clerk shall enter judgment for Defendants Salvador and Solorzano-Pallais on all claims. DONE AND ORDERED this 15th day of March, 2011. s/ Stephan P. Mickle Stephan P. Mickle Chief United States District Judge CASE NO. 5:08cv272-SPM/WCS

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?