Walton v. Daniel

Filing 32

ORDER: For the reasons assigned in the 24 Report and Recommendations of the Magistrate Judge, and having thoroughly reviewed the record, including the written objections filed, and concurring with the findings of the Magistrate Judge under the a pplicable law; IT IS ORDERED that the Plaintiff's 11 Motion to Remand is DENIED and that summary judgment is GRANTED sua sponte, dismissing with prejudice all claims against Randal Daniel. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Defendants' 15 Motion to Strike is GRANTED and the 9 Amended Complaint is STRICKEN. the Court hereby DENIES the Plaintiff's 26 Motion to Amend/Correct Complaint. Additionally, the Court hereby DENIES the Plaintiff's 26 Motion to Unseal Document. Signed by Judge Elizabeth E Foote on 2/19/2015. (crt,Dauterive, C)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
WESTERN DISTRICT OF LOUISIANA
SHREVEPORT DIVISION

ELAINE WALTON

CIVIL ACTION NO. 14-cv-1122

VERSUS

JUDGE ELIZABETH ERNY FOOTE

RANDAL D. DANIEL, JR.

MAGISTRATE JUDGE HORNSBY
ORDER

For the reasons assigned in the Report and Recommendation of the Magistrate
Judge previously filed herein [Record Document 24], and having thoroughly reviewed the
record, including the written objections filed, and concurring with the findings of the
Magistrate Judge under the applicable law;
IT IS ORDERED that the Plaintiff’s Motion to Remand [Record Document 11] is
DENIED and that summary judgment is GRANTED sua sponte, dismissing with prejudice
all claims against Randal Daniel.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Defendants’ Motion to Strike [Record Document
15] is GRANTED and the Amended Complaint [Record Document 9] is STRICKEN.
Moreover, in consideration of the Plaintiff’s Motion To File a Second Supplemental
and Amended Petition and for the same reasons outlined in the Magistrate Judge’s Report
and Recommendation [Record Document 24], the Court hereby DENIES the Plaintiff’s
motion. [Record Document 26]. As set forth in the Report and Recommendation, the Court
instructs the Plaintiff that she may file a motion to amend her complaint and add OS
Restaurant Services, LLC, within the time allowed by a scheduling order, if she believes
that she can state a good-faith claim against that entity under the principles of respondeat
superior. [Record Document 24, p. 14]. Additionally, the Court hereby DENIES the

Plaintiff’s Motion To Unseal Defendant’s “Proprietor” Contracts [Record Document 26],
given the lack of relevance of this contractual material to these proceedings and this
Court’s jurisdiction over Randal Daniel, the confidential nature of the un-redacted sealed
material, and the Magistrate Judge’s previous order directing “any and all non-confidential
provisions or sections of the documents” be accessible through the Court’s public record.
[Record Document 18].
THUS DONE AND SIGNED in Shreveport, Louisiana, this 19th day of February,
2015.