Bloedorn v. Dr. Bruce Grube, et al

Filing 64

ORDER stating that the remaining allegations against Hemm are dismissed. Signed by Judge B. Avant Edenfield on 8/16/2011. (loh)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA
STATESBORO DIVISION

BENJAMIN BLOEDORN,
Plaintiff,
v.

6:09-cv-55

DR. BRUCE GRUBE, DR. TERESA
THOMPSON, SUSAN NELSON,
KENNETH BROWN, CORPORAL
GEORGE HEMM,
Defendants.
ORDER
Plaintiff Benjamin Bloedorn
(“Bloedorn”) sued Defendants, employees
of Georgia Southern University (the
“University”) (collectively “Defendants”),
under 42 U.S.C §§ 1983 and 1988, claiming
that the University’s speech policy deprived
him of his rights to free speech, due process,
and freedom from unreasonable seizure. See
Doc. 54.
Bloedorn, a traveling evangelist,
complained that he was denied the
opportunity to preach freely on the campus
without first obtaining permission from the
University. See id. at 7, 10-11. He also
contested his arrest for criminal trespass and
certain other time, place, and manner
restrictions. See id. at 2, 11-12.
Defendants moved to dismiss the bulk of
these allegations. See Doc. 57. The Court
granted in part and denied in part this
motion. See Doc. 63.

Bloedorn also sought to enjoin Corporal
George Hemm (“Hemm”) from future
enforcement of the University’s speech
policy. See Doc. 54 at 13. Bloedorn alleged
that Hemm was still employed as a public
safety officer for the University. See Doc.
54 at 3.
Hemm moved to dismiss the allegations
against him. See Doc. 57. He submitted an
affidavit in which he swore he was no longer
a University employee. See Doc. 57-4 at 23. The Court could not consider Hemm’s
affidavit without turning the motion into one
for summary judgment. See FED. R. C IV. P.
12(d). But, because it appeared that
Bloedorn’s allegation had no evidentiary
support, see FED. R. C IV. P. 11(b)(3), the
Court ordered Bloedorn to show cause
within ten (10) days of the date of that order
why his remaining claims for prospective
relief against Hemm should not be
dismissed. See Doc. 63 at 4.
Bloedorn failed to respond within this
deadline. Bloedorn’s remaining allegations
against Hemm, see Docs. 54, 63, are
DISMISSED. See FED. R. C IV. P. 41(b);
L.R. 41.1(b); Equity Lifestyle Props., Inc. v.
Fla. Mowing and Landscape Serv., Inc., 556
F.3d 1232, 1241 (11th Cir. 2009) (“A
district court need not tolerate defiance of
reasonable orders.”).

This 16th day of August 2011.

S96:j;

i,,

EL AVANT PDENFIELØ, JUDGE
UNFED STATES DISTRICT COURT
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA