Otero v. Smith et al

Filing 18

RULING AND ORDER Adopting Report and Recommendation of the U.S. Magistrate Judge 17 as the Court's opinion herein. Defendant's Motion for Summary Judgment (doc. 16) is GRANTED. Plaintiff's claims against Anthony Whitiker, Nathani el Murray, and Calvin Walker are DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE for Plaintiff's failure to timely effect service upon them. Plaintiff's Eighth Amendment claims against Jimmy Smith, Sam Adams, Joseph Barr, Marcus Callahan, and Edward Honeycutt are DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE for failure to exhaust administrative remedies. Plaintiff's remaining claims against Jimmy Smith, Sam Adams, Joseph Barr, Marcus Callahan, and Edward Honeycutt regarding disciplinary proceedings and the handling of his grievance are DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE as frivolous and for failure to state a claim upon which relief may be granted. The Court declines to exercise supplemental jurisdiction in connection with any potential remaining state law claims asserted against Jimmy Smith, Sam Adams, Joseph Barr, Marcus Callahan, and Edward Honeycutt. Signed by Chief Judge Brian A. Jackson on 1/31/2017. (PJH)

Download PDF
additional defendants named in this action, for Plaintiffs failure to ensure proper service of process pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure ("Rule") 4(m). (Doc. 17 at pp. 2 n. 1, 10; see also Docs. 11, 12).1 The Report and Recommendation specifically notified Plaintiff that, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. ยง 636(b)(1), he had fourteen (14) days from the date he received the Report and Recommendation to file written objections to the proposed findings of fact, conclusions of law, and recommendations therein. (Doc. 17 at p. 1). Plaintiff did not file objections to the Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendation. Having carefully considered the underlying Complaint, the instant motion, and related filings, the Court APPROVES the Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendation, and hereby ADOPTS same as its own findings of fact, conclusions oflaw, and recommendations contained therein. Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED that the Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendation (Doc. 17) is ADOPTED as the Court's opinion herein. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Defendants' Motion for Summary Judgment (Doc. 16) is GRANTED. 1 Although Plaintiffs Complaint (Doc. 1) names Anthony Whitiker, Nathaniel Murray, and Calvin Walker as defendants, the record demonstrates that these defendants have not yet been served. (Doc. 11). Plaintiff was informed of the lack of service by the Clerk of Court but failed to eorreet this procedural defect. Therefore, the Magistrate Judge recommends that Anthony Whitiker, Nathaniel Murray and Calvin Walker be dismissed without prejudice "for failure of the plaintiff to effect timely service upon them." (Doc. 17 at p. 2, n. 1). 2 IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Plaintiffs claims against Anthony Whitiker, Natha niel Murray, and Calvin Walker are DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE for Plaintiffs failure to timely effect service upon them. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Plaintiffs Eighth Amendment claims against Jimmy Smith, Sam Adams, Joseph Barr, Marcus Callahan, and Edward Honeycutt are DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE for failure to exha ust administrative r emedies. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Plaintiffs remammg claims against Jimmy Smith, Sam Adams, Joseph Barr, Marcus Callahan, and Edward Honeycutt regarding disciplinary proceedings a nd the handling of his grievance are DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE as frivolous and for failure to state a claim upon which relief may be granted. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Court declines to exerc1se supplemental jurisdiction in connection with any potential remaining state law claims asserted against Jimmy Smith, Sam Adams, Joseph Barr, Marcus Callahan, and Edward Honeycutt. s- Ba ton Rouge, Louisiana, this 3l..J.day of January, 2017. BRIAN A. JAC , CHIEF JUDGE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT MIDDLE DISTRICT OF LOUISIANA 3

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?