Smith v. Owens et al

Filing 172

ORDER granting 152 Motion for Summary Judgment; adopting 169 Report and Recommendations. Therefore, judgment shall be entered in favor of the defendant and this civil action is closed. Signed by Judge Dudley H. Bowen on 12/4/13. (cmr)

ORIOINAL
STATESDISTRICTCOURT
IN THE LTNITED
DISTRICTOF GEORGIA
FORTHE SOUTHERN

FII FN

U . S I S T R IC O U R T
O
CT
r,|rltjsIA 0lv_

2013 -b Atif0:0lr
OEC

'LERXS#till

DUBLINDIVISION

J.
LESTER SMITH.JR..
Plaintifl

cv 311-044
DONALD BARROW,
Defendant.

ORDER
After a careful,de novoreviewof the file, the Courtconcurs
with the Magistrate
("R&R"), to whichobjections
ReportandRecommendation
havebeenfiled (doc.
Judge's
judgment
grantingDefendant's
Judge
recommended
summary
no. 171). The Magistrate
(l)
the
motion because Plaintiff had failed to show that Defendant, Wardenat Telfair
for
violationof failure
StatePrison,was liable as a supervisor the allegedconstitutional
Plaintiff s religiouspreferences; (2) Defendant
and
to providemealsthat accommodate
wasentitledto qualifiedimmunity. (Doc.no. 169.)
previously
madeand
of
Plaintiff s objections mainlya reiteration contentions
are
rejectedby the MagistrateJudge. One point, however,warrantsfurther comment.
personal
to
violationis provenby
connection the alleged
Plaintiff states Defendant's
that
that
by
his prisonprofile history,provided Plaintiffnow for the first time,which indicates
8,
he receiveda restrictedvegandiet beginningon September 2009 at Macon State

at
Prison,until April 22,2010, while incarcerated Telfair StatePrison. (Id. at 7.) This
profile merely suggests Plaintiff initially had a restricted
diet plan while at Telfair
that
Nothingin Plaintiff s profile history
from it by someone.
StatePrisonandwasremoved
personally
removedPlaintiff from the programor is otherwise
showsthat Defendant
responsible his removal. (Seedoc. no. 171,p. 7.) Additionally,this new evidence
for
his
offered by Plaintiff directly contradicts own admissionthat he was not on the
list
AltemativeEntrdeProgram uponhis arrivalat Telfair StatePrison. (Id. at 2.) Thus,
no
as the Magistrate
Judgecorrectlyfound, Plaintiff has produced evidenceof either
personalparticipationin the allegedconstitutional
violation or a causal
Defendant's
connectionbetweenDefendant
and the allegedviolation. (Doc. no. 169, pp. 8-10.)
Moreover, this evidencedoes not changethe MagistrateJudge's conclusionthat
Defendant entitledto qualifiedimmunity. (SceDoc.no. 169.)
is
Accordingly, Plaintiff s objectionsare OVERRULED, and the Report and
Recommendation the Magistrate
of
Judgeis ADOPTED as the opinion of the Court.
judgmentis GRANTED, a final judgment
Therefore,
Defendant's
motionfor summary
shallbe ENTERED in favorof Defendant, this civil actionis CLOSED.
arxi

soORDERED
*;rfuuvor

7

2013,at August4Georgia.