McCaskill v. Dettloff

Filing 25

OPINION AND ORDER denying 11 Motion for Summary Judgment; adopting 22 Report and Recommendation. Signed by District Judge Patrick J. Duggan. (MOre)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN
SOUTHERN DIVISION
DeANDRE McCASKILL, #316770,
Plaintiff,
v.

NO. 2:11-cv-12824
HON. PATRICK J. DUGGAN
MAG. MICHAEL J. HLUCHANIUK

KENNETH DETTLOFF,
Defendant.
__________________________/
OPINION AND ORDER DENYING DEFENDANT DETTLOFF’S MOTION FOR
SUMMARY JUDGMENT
On June 30, 2011, Plaintiff, a prisoner in the custody of the Michigan Department
of Corrections and proceeding pro se, filed this lawsuit against Defendant alleging a First
Amendment retaliation claim and a conspiracy claim. See ECF No. 1. Plaintiff seeks to
remedy these alleged civil rights violations using 42 U.S.C. §§ 1983 and 1985.
Defendant filed a motion for summary judgment pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil
Procedure 56 on September 16, 2011. See ECF No. 11. This Court referred the motion
to Magistrate Judge Michael Hluchaniuk under the authority granted by 28 U.S.C. §
636(b)(1)(B). See ECF No. 14.
Magistrate Judge Hluchaniuk issued a Report and Recommendation (“R&R”), on
July 13, 2012, recommending that this Court deny Defendant’s motion. See Report and
Recommendation, ECF No. 22. At the conclusion of his R&R, Magistrate Judge
Hluchaniuk informed the parties that any objections to the R&R must be filed within

fourteen days and that the “[f]ailure to file specific objections constitutes a waiver of any
further right of appeal.” Id. at 13 (citations omitted). Neither party filed objections.
Magistrate Judge Hluchaniuk determined that Plaintiff sufficiently demonstrated
the requisite elements of a First Amendment retaliation claim and that Defendant failed to
satisfy his burden of demonstrating the appropriateness of summary judgment as a matter
of law. Id. Given Magistrate Judge Hluchaniuk’s determination that questions of fact
regarding Plaintiff’s claims have yet to be resolved, the conclusion that Defendant is not
entitled to summary judgment is proper. As such, after careful review of the R&R, this
Court concurs with the conclusions reached by Magistrate Judge Hluchaniuk.
Accordingly,
IT IS ORDERED, that Magistrate Judge Hluchaniuk’s R&R is adopted and
Defendant Kenneth Dettloff’s motion for summary judgment is DENIED.

Dated: September 18, 2012
s/PATRICK J. DUGGAN
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
Copies to:
DeAndre McCaskill, 316770
EARNEST C. BROOKS CORRECTIONAL FACILITY
2500 S. SHERIDAN DRIVE
MUSKEGON HEIGHTS, MI 49444
Clifton B. Schneider, Esq.