Scott v. Owens et al

Filing 27

ORDER ADOPTING the Magistrate Judge's 13 Report and Recommendation. Plaintiff's claims against Perry are DISMISSED in their entirety, and Perry is no longer a named Defendant. Plaintiff's monetary damages claims against Dunnam in her official capacity and his injunctive relief claims are DISMISSED. Signed by Chief Judge Lisa G. Wood on 8/11/2014. (csr)

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

LEE DIXON SCOTT, III,
Plaintiff,
CIVIL ACTION NO.: CV514-005

VS.

GRADY PERRY, Warden, and
Sgt. ODELL DUNNAM,
Defendants.

ORDER

After an independent and de novo review of the entire record, the undersigned
concurs with the Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendation, to which Plaintiff
filed Objections. In his Objections, Plaintiff asserts that Grady Perry should be held to a
higher standard than his subordinates. Plaintiff also asserts that Grady Perry "learned
of the violation of [his] rights and failed to do anything to fix the situation[ ]", and he
"created a policy or custom allowing or encouraging the acts." First, Plaintiffs
allegations against Grady Perry reveal that he seeks to hold Perry liable based solely on
his supervisory position as Warden. The Magistrate Judge informed Plaintiff that he
cannot base his allegations solely on Perry's supervisory position in a cause of action
AO 72A
(Rev. 8/82)

brought pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. In addition, to the extent Plaintiff attempts to
make factual allegations against Perry in his Objections to sustain a cause of action
against Perry, Plaintiffs attempt fails. This Court's customary practice is not to address
contentions raised for the first time in Objections. Williams v. McNeil, 557 F.3d 1287
(11th Cir. 2009). Even if the Court were to address Plaintiffs factual allegations against
Perry, Plaintiff cannot sustain a claim against Perry. "A complaint must state a facially
plausible claim for relief, and '[a] claim has facial plausibility when the plaintiff pleads
factual content that allows the court to draw the reasonable inference that the defendant
is liable for the misconduct alleged." Wooten v. Quicken Loans, Inc., 626 F.3d 1187,
1196 (11th Cir. 2010) (quoting Ashcroft v. lgbal, 556 U.S. 662, 678 (2009)). "A pleading
that offers labels and conclusions or a formulaic recitation of the elements of a cause of
action" does not suffice. Ashcroft, 556 U.S. at 678.
"The plausibility standard is not akin to a probability requirement, but it asks for
more than a sheer possibility that a defendant has acted unlawfully. Where a complaint
pleads facts that are merely consistent with a defendant's liability, it stops short of the
line between possibility and plausibility of entitlement to relief." Id. (internal punctuation
and citation omitted). While a court must accept all factual allegations in a complaint as
true, this tenet "is inapplicable to legal conclusions. Threadbare recitals of the elements
of a cause of action, supported by mere conclusory statements," are insufficient. I d.
Plaintiffs assertions against Perry are conclusory and do not reach the plausibility
standard.
Plaintiffs Objections are overruled.

The Magistrate Judge's Report and

Recommendation is adopted as the opinion of the Court. Plaintiffs claims against Perry

AO 72A

(Rev. 8/82)

2

are DISMISSED in their entirety, and Perry is no longer a named Defendant. Plaintiff's
monetary damages claims against Dunnam in her official capacity and his injunctive
relief claims are DISMISSED.
SO ORDERED, this

t

day of

2014.

SA GOUBEY WOOD, CHIEF JUDGE
NITE' STATES DISTRICT COURT
DUTIERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA

AO 72A
(Rev. 8/82)

3