Baker v. Hertz et al

Filing 83

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER, The Court ADOPTS the Report in its entirety (Doc. 76 ); and DENIES the defendants' motion to dismiss or, in the alternative, for summary judgment (Doc. 54 ). Signed by Judge J. Phil Gilbert on 4/27/2016. (jdh)

Download PDF
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS JEFFREY BAKER, Plaintiff, v. Case No. 15-cv-600-JPG-DGW ROBERT HERTZ, JOHN LAKIN, GARY BOST, DONALD BUNT, ROBERT HOLLENBACH, RANDY YOUNG, LT. HILL, MIRAN THOMPSON, SGT. DOVER, JODIE COLLMAN, PAUL SARHAGE, STEVE RIDINGS, DONALD McNAUGHTON, KENT GRIFFITH, TIM WALKER, CRAIG RICHERT, MIKE TASSOME, MIKE HARE, OFCR. MARK SPURGEON, BLAKE SELLERS, MARK RYAN, MATT MILLER, ROBERT BLANKENSHIP, MARTHA MAJOR, ALICIA RUSHING, and VALERIE BASSETS, Defendants. MEMORANDUM AND ORDER This matter comes before the Court on the Report and Recommendation (“Report”) (Doc. 76) of Magistrate Judge Donald G. Wilkerson recommending that the Court deny the motion to dismiss or, in the alternative, for summary judgment filed or joined by all defendants (Docs. 54 & 64). The Court may accept, reject or modify, in whole or in part, the findings or recommendations of the magistrate judge in a report and recommendation. Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b)(3). The Court must review de novo the portions of the report to which objections are made. Id. “If no objection or only partial objection is made, the district court judge reviews those unobjected portions for clear error.” Johnson v. Zema Sys. Corp., 170 F.3d 734, 739 (7th Cir. 1999). The Court has received no objection to the Report. The Court has reviewed the entire file and finds that the Report is not clearly erroneous. Accordingly, the Court hereby:  ADOPTS the Report in its entirety (Doc. 76); and  DENIES the defendants’ motion to dismiss or, in the alternative, for summary judgment (Doc. 54). IT IS SO ORDERED. DATED: April 27, 2016 s/ J. Phil Gilbert J. PHIL GILBERT DISTRICT JUDGE 2

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?