Warren v. Douglas Police Department et al

Filing 46

ORDER adopting Report and Recommendations re 41 . Signed by Chief Judge William T. Moore on 1/21/2009. (loh)

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

2010JfJ21 AMII : 4

DERRICK WARREN, Plaintiff,
mo

CASE NO. CV508-026

DOUGLAS POLICE DEPARTMENT, CHIEF CLIFFORD THOMAS, RODGER GODDARD, JOHN SHEALY, and PAT DOHERTY, Defendants.

ORDER

Before the Court is the Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendation (Doc. 41), to which objections' have been filed (Doc. 45) . After a careful de novo review, the Court concurs with the Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendation. Therefore, the Report and Recommendation is ADOPTED as the Plaintiff makes no specific objections, but simply asks the Court to ignore the Report and Recommendation. (Doc. 45.) However, the Report and Recommendation was not generally objectionable. At summary judgment the Court takes all the evidence as a whole and draws all inferences in the light most favorable to the nonmoving party. Burger King Corp. V. E-Z Eating, 41 Corp., 572 F.3d 1306, 1312-13 (11th Cir. 2009). However, once the Defendant has provided evidence establishing the lack of a material issue of fact, the Plaintiff must offer competent evidence rebutting that showing. Id. at 1313. In the absence of such evidence, the Court can rely on the undisputed facts put forth by the Defendant. See Id. Here, the Magistrate Judge was correct to rely on Defendant's evidence because it was not rebutted by competent proof; Plaintiff's statement of material facts was neither a sworn statement, nor did it rely on other evidence to establish the allegations contained within it. (See Docs. 28, 32.)
1

Opinion of this Court.

Accordingly, this case is DISMISSED.

The Clerk of Court is DIRECTED to close this case. f day of January, 2010. SO ORDERED this

WILLIAM T. MOORS, JR., CHIEF JUDGE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA

2