Taylor v. Williams et al
ORDER overruling Plaintiff's objections, adopting the 19 Report and Recommendations, dismissing the Complaint for failure to state a claim, and denying Plaintiff leave to proceed in forma pauperis on appeal. The Clerk of Court is directed to enter the appropriate judgment of dismissal and close this case. Signed by Chief Judge J. Randal Hall on 05/26/2017. (thb)
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA
FRANK JAMES TAYLOR,
CIVIL ACTION NO.: 6:16-cv-137
WARDEN DOUG WILLIAMS;
COUNSELOR SMITH; OFFICER
MITCHELL; OFFICER SANTIAGO; MR.
SIMMONS; CERT TEAM GOMAZ; and
CORRECTIONAL OFFICER CLARK,
Presently before the Court are Plaintiffs Objections to the Magistrate Judge's Report and
Recommendation dated March 31, 2017, (doc. 19). After an independent and de novo review of
the entire record, the Court concurs with the Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendation.
Plaintiffs Objections speak only to the recommended dismissal of Plaintiffs claims against
Defendants Williams and Smith, (doc. 22), and underscore the reasons the Magistrate Judge
recommended dismissal of Plaintiffs claims against these two Defendants.
Accordingly, the Court ADOPTSthe Magistrate Judge's Report andRecommendation as
the opinion of the Court and OVERRULES Plaintiffs Objections. The Court DISMISSES
Plaintiffs Complaint for failure to state a claim and DIRECTS the Clerk of Court to enter the
appropriate judgment of dismissal and to CLOSE this case.
Additionally, for the reasons stated by the Magistrate Judge, the Court DENIES Plaintiff
leave to proceed informa pauperis on appeal.
SO ORDERED, this _^^f day of May, 2017.
.UINITED S/TATES DISTRICT COURT
DISTRICT OF GEORGIA
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?