Sandoval v. Lift et al

Filing 27

ORDER granting 14 Motion for Summary Judgment; adopting 23 Report and Recommendations.Ordered by Judge C. Ashley Royal on 9/25/08 (dcp)

Download PDF
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF GEORGIA MACON DIVISION JESSEE SANDOVAL, Plaintiff, v. CARL LIFT, M.D., and DAVID BUTTS, Defendants. __________________________________ : : : : : : : : : : Case No.: 5:07-cv-293 (CAR) ORDER ON THE UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE'S RECOMMENDATION Before the Court is the United States Magistrate Judge's Recommendation [Doc. 23] to grant Defendants' Motion for Summary Judgment [Doc. 14]. Plaintiff has filed an Objection [Doc. 24] to the Recommendation in which he objects to the Magistrate Judge's conclusion that there are no genuine issues of material fact regarding his deliberate indifference and retaliatory transfer claims. Having considered Plaintiff's objections and having investigated the matters de novo, this Court agrees with the conclusions and findings of the United States Magistrate Judge that summary judgment should be granted for Defendants. Therefore, the Recommendation is HEREBY ADOPTED AND MADE THE ORDER OF THE COURT. In his Objection, and as pointed out by the Defendants in their Response to Plaintiff's Objection, Plaintiff simply restates his unsupported and conclusory allegations of deliberate indifference and retaliation. After review of the record, as stated by the United States Magistrate Judge in his Recommendation, Plaintiff has failed to provide sufficient evidentiary support for his claims. As such, Plaintiff's arguments are without merit. CONCLUSION For the reasons explained above, the Recommendation [Doc. 23] to is HEREBY ADOPTED AND MADE THE ORDER OF THE COURT. SO ORDERED, this 25th day of September, 2008. S/ C. Ashley Royal C. ASHLEY ROYAL UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE SSH 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?