Johnson et al v. Wickersham et al
Filing
74
ORDER Adopting 68 Report and Recommendation and Granting Defendants' 56 Motion to Dismiss Deontay Johnson as Plaintiff in this Action. Deontay Johnson terminated. Signed by District Judge Matthew F. Leitman. (Monda, H)
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN
SOUTHERN DIVISION
DEONTAY JOHNSON, et al.,
Plaintiffs,
Case No. 13-cv-13672
Hon. Matthew F. Leitman
v.
ANTHONY WICKERSHAM, et al.,
Defendants.
_________________________________/
ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION (ECF #68)
AND GRANTING DEFENDANTS’ MOTION TO DISMISS DEONTAY
JOHNSON AS PLAINTIFF IN THIS ACTION (ECF #56)
On August 27, 2013, Plaintiffs Deontay Johnson (“Johnson”), Ronald
Whitney (“Whitney”), and Dorian Willis (“Willis”) filed a prisoner civil rights
Complaint related to their incarceration at the Macomb County Jail. (See Compl.,
ECF #1.)
On April 11, 2014, Johnson appeared for his previously-noticed
deposition. According to Defendants, when Defendants attempted to question
Johnson during the deposition about his criminal conviction history, Johnson
refused to answer these questions and he prematurely terminated the deposition.
(See ECF #37.)
On June 9, 2014, Defendants filed a motion to compel Johnson’s attendance
at a continued deposition. (See the “Motion to Compel,” id.) Johnson did not
1
respond to the Motion to Compel, and on September 24, 2014, the Magistrate
Judge granted the motion by written order. (See ECF #46.) In this Order, the
Magistrate Judge expressly warned Johnson that his “failure to appear for his redeposition may subject him to sanctions, including dismissal of his complaint.”
(Id. at 2, Pg. ID 241.)
Defendants served Johnson with a notice of the continued deposition on
October 2, 2014. (See ECF #56-2.) The continued deposition was scheduled for
October 22, 2014. (See id.) According to Defendants, Johnson did not appear for
the continued deposition.
Defendants have now moved to dismiss Johnson as a Plaintiff in this action
due to his failure to appear for the continued deposition. (See the “Motion to
Dismiss,” ECF #56.) Johnson did not timely respond to the Motion to Dismiss.
Thus, on December 19, 2014, the Magistrate Judge entered an Order requiring
Johnson to file a response to the Motion to Dismiss “on or before January 13,
2015.” (See ECF #61.) The Magistrate Judge further told Johnson that “[h]is
failure to [file a response to the Motion to Dismiss] will result in a
recommendation that his complaint be dismissed.” (Id.)
Johnson did not file a response to the Motion to Dismiss as the Magistrate
Judge ordered.
Accordingly, and as the Magistrate Judge expressly warned
Johnson would happen, the Magistrate Judge has submitted a Report and
2
Recommendation to the Court that recommends that Defendants’ Motion to
Dismiss be granted and Johnson be dismissed as a Plaintiff in this action. (See the
“R&R,” ECF #68.) Johnson was informed in the R&R that if he wished to object
to the recommendation, he needed to file specific objections with the Court within
fourteen days. (See id. at 4-5, Pg. ID 344-345.)
Johnson has not filed any objections to the R&R.
The failure to file
objections to a Report and Recommendation waives any further right to appeal.
See Howard v. Sec'y of Health and Human Servs., 932 F.2d 505 (6th Cir. 1991);
Smith v. Detroit Fed'n of Teachers Local 231, 829 F.2d 1370, 1373 (6th Cir. 1987).
Likewise, the failure to object releases the Court from its duty to independently
review the matter. See Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140, 149 (1985). The Court has
nevertheless reviewed the R&R and agrees with the findings and conclusions of
the Magistrate Judge that Johnson should be dismissed as a Plaintiff in this action.
Therefore, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the R&R (ECF #46) is
ADOPTED as the Opinion of this Court. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED, for the
reasons stated in the R&R, that Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss Deontay Johnson
as Plaintiff (ECF #56) is GRANTED.
Dated: February 23, 2015
s/Matthew F. Leitman
MATTHEW F. LEITMAN
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
3
I hereby certify that a copy of the foregoing document was served upon the
parties and/or counsel of record on February 23, 2015, by electronic means and/or
ordinary mail.
s/Holly A. Monda
Case Manager
(313) 234-5113
4
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?