Turner v. Dasher et al
Filing
59
ORDER granting 45 Motion to Dismiss and adopting re 53 Report and Recommendations. Signed by Judge B. Avant Edenfield on 10/24/12. (bcw)
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA
STATESBORO DIVISION
MARVIN TURNER,
Plaintiff,
CIVIL ACTION NO.: CV6II-098
V.
DANE DASHER; JOHN PAUL; LARRY
BREWTON; KAREN DEKELE; Officer
LANE; Officer KING; Officer LILLIARD;
Lt. THOMAS; and DON JARRIEL,
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 Objections
have been filed. In his Objections, Plaintiff asserts that the Magistrate Judge
misconstrued the standard of review applicable to the deliberate indifference to safety
claims Plaintiff set forth. Plaintiff also asserts that the Magistrate Judge did not make a
proper determination that Defendants had a subjective awareness of a substantial risk
of harm to Plaintiffs safety. Plaintiff further asserts that the Magistrate Judge's
recommendation is premature because Plaintiff has not had the opportunity to initiate
discovery.
Plaintiff fails to set forth any facts which would arguably lead to the reasonable
inference that Movants are liable for any alleged misconduct. Plaintiffs Objections are
without merit. The Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendation is adopted as the
AO 72A
(Rev. 8/82)
opinion of the Court. Movants' Motion to Dismiss is GRANTED. Plaintiffs claims
against Defendants Don Jarriel, Dane Dasher, John Paul, Larry Brewton, Tammie
Thomas, and Karen Dekele are DISMISSED. Plaintiff's claims against Lt. Thomas,
Correctional Officers Lane and King, and FNU Lilliard shall remain pending.
SO ORDERED, this
of
, 2012.
1.
B4'ANFIf"
UNITED STATES D RICT COURT
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA
AO 72A
(Rev. (S2
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?