Addison v. United States Of America

Filing 35

ORDER ADOPTING the 24 Report and Recommendations of the Magistrate Judge. The Plaintiff's objections are overruled. The Plaintiff's complaint is dismissed. The Clerk is directed to enter the appropriate judgment of dismissal. Signed by Chief Judge Lisa G. Wood on 7/10/2012. (ca)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA
BRUNSWICK DIVISION

SEAN ROBERT ADDISON,
Plaintiff,
vs.

CIVIL ACTION NO.: CV2II-176

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Defendant.

ORDER
After an independent and de novo review of the record, the undersigned concurs
with the Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendation, to which Objections were
filed.' Defendant United States of America ("United States") filed . a Response. In his
Objections, Plaintiff contends that the Magistrate Judge overlooked his broader claim
that the prison officials had a constitutional duty to protect him from attack. However, it
is Plaintiff who overlooks that he only named the United States of America as a
Defendant for the negligent actions of its employees, and, as such, his Complaint was
served based on the Federal Tort Claims Act ("FTCA"), which permits causes of action
in tort against the United States of America. The FTCA does not permit a plaintiff to

1 Plaintiffs

Objections found at Docket Entry Number 31 and filed on June 15, 2012, are nothing more
than an exact copy of Plaintiffs Objections found at Docket Entry Number 27, which were filed on May 7,
2012. The undersigned notes the United States' contention that Plaintiffs Objections were untimely, as
they were to be filed on or before May 3, 2012. However, Plaintiff states in his "Certificate of Mailing" that
he delivered his Objections to prison staff on April 27, 2012. (Doc. No. 27, p. 8). Given this, Plaintiffs
Objections are not untimely, as April 27, 2012, is the date on which his Objections were filed. Houston v.
487 U.S. 266, 276 (1988) (a prisoner's pleading is filed when he delivers it to prison officials for
forwarding).
AO 72A
(Rev. 8/82)

pursue a cause of action for constitutional violations. If Plaintiff was not satisfied with
the basis of the Court's service of his Complaint, the time for objection is not in
response to the Magistrate Judge's Report addressing the United States' Motion to
Dismiss.
Plaintiff also objects to the Magistrate Judge's failure to consider the attachments
the United States submitted in support of its Motion. It was not error for the Magistrate
Judge to not consider these attachments. It is clear the Magistrate Judge relied on the
pleadings without attachments and the law in reaching his recommended disposition of
the United States' Motion.
Plaintiffs Objections are overruled. The Magistrate Judge's Report and
Recommendation is adopted as the opinion of the Court. The United States' Motion to
Dismiss is GRANTED. Plaintiffs Complaint is DISMISSED. The Clerk of Court is
directed to enter the appropriate judgment of dismissal.
SO ORDERED, this ___ day ofJ.'\

1 A

2012.

USA GODEY WOOD, CHIEF JUDGE
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA

AO 72A
(Rev. 8/82)

2