Mahaffey v. Buskirk et al

Filing 73

Order Adopting 71 Report and Recommendation and Granting Summer Laughhunn's 36 Motion to Dismiss. Signed by District Judge Avern Cohn. (SCha)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN
SOUTHERN DIVISION

MARK MAHAFFEY,
Plaintiff,
v.

Case No. 13-14646

JOSHUA BUSKIRK,
FRANCES HINSLEY, JEFFREY
STIEVE, SUMMER LAUGHHUNN,
JACOB, SHARP, HARRIET SQUIER, and
HARESH B. PANDYA,

HONORABLE AVERN COHN

Defendants.
___________________________________/
ORDER
ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION (Doc. 71)
AND
GRANTING SUMMER LAUGHHUNN'S MOTION TO DISMISS (Doc. 36)
I.
This is a pro se prisoner civil rights case. Plaintiff is an inmate in the custody of
the Michigan Department of Corrections (MDOC). He asserts a claim under 42 U.S.C.
§ 1983 against defendants claiming a violation of his Eighth Amendment rights due to
inadequate medical care for the treatment of a back condition. The matter was referred
to a magistrate judge for all pretrial proceedings. (Doc. 24).
Plaintiff initially named eleven (11) defendants. Following motion practice, the
defendants are: Joshua Buskirk, Harriet Squier, Haresh Pandya, Frances Hinsley,

Jeffrey Stieve, Summer Laughhunn, Sharp and Jacob.1
Laughhunn filed a motion to dismiss (Doc. 36). Plaintiff did not oppose the
motion. On February 6, 2015, the magistrate judge issued a report and
recommendation, recommending that the motion be granted. (Doc. 71).
II.
Neither party has filed objections to the MJRR and the time for filing objections
has passed. The failure to file objections to the report and recommendation waives any
further right to appeal. Smith v. Detroit Federation of Teachers Local 231, 829 F.2d
1370, 1373 (6th Cir. 1987). Likewise, the failure to object to the magistrate judge's
report releases the Court from its duty to independently review the motions. Thomas v.
Arn, 474 U.S. 140, 149 (1985). The Court has reviewed the MJRR and agrees with the
magistrate judge's recommendation.
III.
Accordingly, the findings and conclusions of the magistrate judge are ADOPTED
as the findings and conclusions of the Court. Laughhunn's motion to dismiss is
GRANTED.
SO ORDERED.
S/Avern Cohn
AVERN COHN
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
Dated: March 3, 2015
Detroit, MI
1

Pandya and Stieve have filed separate motions for summary judgment (Docs.
46, 54). The magistrate judge recently issued a MJRR recommending that the motions
be granted. (Doc. 72). The time for objections has not yet passed. Also, Buskirk and
Squire have filed a motion for summary judgment (Doc. 63). It remains pending before
the magistrate judge. As to the remaining defendants, Sharp and Jacob, the MDOC
has said they do not employ either of them. See Docs. 40, 41.

13-14646 Mahaffey v. Buskirk et al
I hereby certify that a copy of the foregoing document was mailed to the attorneys of
record on this date, March 3, 2015, by electronic and/or ordinary mail.

S/Sakne Chami
Case Manager, [phone]