Tidwell v. Asselmeier et al

Filing 246

ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS: The Court ADOPTS in its entirety Judge Williams' R&R (Doc. 215 ) and DENIES Defendants' summary judgment motion. (Doc. 174 ). Finally, the Court notes that on January 15, 2019, coun sel for Defendants Henderson and Walls (Brett Furmanski) filed a notice of settlement as to all of Plaintiff Tidwell's claims against them. (Doc. 224 ). Mr. Furmanski is DIRECTED to file a status report as to the status of that settlement on or before March 25, 2019. Signed by Chief Judge Michael J. Reagan on 3/18/2019. (rah)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS
CLEO TIDWELL, #N41754,

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

Plaintiff,
vs.
DR. ASSELMEIER,
DR. TROST,
STEVEN NEWBOLD,
DR. STROW,
HARRY HENDERSON,
GAIL WALLS, and
WEXFORD HEALTH SOURCES, INC.,
Defendants.

Case No. 16-cv-0041-MJR-GCS

ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION
REAGAN, Chief Judge:
Plaintiff Cleo Tidwell, an inmate at Menard Correctional Center (“Menard”), filed
this action on January 14, 2016, alleging violations of his constitutional rights pursuant to
42 U.S.C. § 1983 while he was incarcerated at Menard and Lawrence Correctional Center
(“Lawrence”). Seven Defendants are named herein. Two Defendants, Harry Henderson
and Gail Walls, moved for summary judgment based on lack of exhaustion on June 13,
2018. (Doc. 174). Plaintiff Tidwell timely responded on August 17, 2018. (Doc. 185). The
Magistrate Judge assigned to the case at that time (the Honorable Stephen C. Williams)
took the motion under advisement.
Now before the Court is a Report and Recommendation submitted by Judge
Williams. (Doc. 215, R&R). The thorough and detailed R&R recommends that the
undersigned deny the summary judgment motion. The R&R plainly stated that any
1

objection must be filed by January 14, 2019. (Doc. 215). That date passed, with neither an
objection nor a motion for extension of the objection deadline filed. Because no objection
was lodged against the R&R, the undersigned need not conduct de novo review of the
R&R. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C) (A judge shall make a de novo determination of those
portions of the report or specified proposed findings or recommendations to which
objection is made.); Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140 (1985); Johnson v. Zema Sys. Corp., 170
F.3d 734, 741 (7th Cir. 1999); Video Views, Inc. v. Studio 21, Ltd., 797 F.2d 538 (7th Cir.
1986).
The Court ADOPTS in its entirety Judge Williams’ R&R (Doc. 215) and DENIES
Defendants’ summary judgment motion. (Doc. 174). Finally, the Court notes that on
January 15, 2019, counsel for Defendants Henderson and Walls (Brett Furmanski) filed a
notice of settlement as to all of Plaintiff Tidwell’s claims against them. (Doc. 224). Mr.
Furmanski is DIRECTED to file a status report as to the status of that settlement on or
before March 25, 2019.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
DATED: March 18, 2019.

s/ Michael J. Reagan
MICHAEL J. REAGAN
Chief Judge
United States District Court

2