Hill et al v. Iberia Parish et al

Filing 106

REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS re 53 MOTION for Summary Judgment Pursuant to FRCP 56 filed by David Broussard, Ernest Wilson, Hilda Curry, Dan Doerle, Freddie DeCourt, Raymond Lewis, Rocky Romero, Therese Segura Objections to R&R due by 3/27/2009. Signed by Magistrate Judge C Michael Hill on 3/10/09. (crt,Roaix, G).

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT W E S T E R N DISTRICT OF LOUISIANA L A F A Y E T T E -O P E L O U S A S DIVISION

C H E R Y L HILL, ET AL V S. SHERIFFS OFFICE IBERIA PARISH, ET AL

* C I V I L ACTION NO. 07-1607 * J U D G E WALTER * M A G I S T R A T E JUDGE HILL

R E P O R T AND RECOMMENDATION ON MOTION FOR SUMMARY JU D G M E NT P e n d in g before the undersigned for report and recommendation is the Motion for S u m m a ry Judgment filed by defendants, Hilda Curry (the "Mayor"), and Therese Segura, E rn e st Wilson, David Broussard, Rocky Romero, Raymond Lewis, Dan Doerle and F re d d ie DeCourt (collectively, the "City"), on July 7, 2008 [rec. doc. 53]. The undersigned held oral argument on the motion on November 19, 2008, at which h e a rin g I stated as follows: "If Judge Walter adopts the Report and Recommendation re c o m m e n d in g dismissal of the City, then the Motion for Summary Judgment [rec. doc. 5 3 ] will be moot." [rec. doc. 99]. On December 8, 2008, Judge Walter entered a J u d g m e n t dismissing the City. [rec. doc. 103]. Accordingly, the undersigned recommends that the Motion for Summary Judgment [ re c . doc. 53] be DISMISSED AS MOOT. Under the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C) and F.R.Civ.Proc. 72(b), parties ag g riev ed by this recommendation have ten (10) business days from service of this Report

a n d Recommendation to file specific, written objections with the Clerk of Court. A party m a y respond to another party's objections within ten (10) days after being served with a c o p y thereof. Counsel are directed to furnish a courtesy copy of any objections or re sp o n s e s to the District Judge at the time of filing. F A IL U R E TO FILE WRITTEN OBJECTIONS TO THE PROPOSED F A C T U A L FINDINGS AND/OR THE PROPOSED LEGAL CONCLUSIONS R E F L E C T E D IN THIS REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION WITHIN TEN (10) D A Y S FOLLOWING THE DATE OF ITS SERVICE, OR WITHIN THE TIME F R A M E AUTHORIZED BY FED.R.CIV.P. 6(b), SHALL BAR AN AGGRIEVED P A R T Y FROM ATTACKING THE FACTUAL FINDINGS OR THE LEGAL C O N C L U S I O N S ACCEPTED BY THE DISTRICT COURT, EXCEPT UPON GROUNDS OF PLAIN ERROR. DOUGLASS V. UNITED S E R V I C E S AUTOMOBILE ASSOCIATION, 79 F.3D 1415 (5TH CIR. 1996). M a rc h 10, 2009, at Lafayette, Louisiana

2