Mudford v. Brown et al

Filing 18

ORDER Granting Defendants' 10 and 11 Motions for Summary Judgment. Signed by District Judge Matthew F. Leitman. (HMon)

Download PDF
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN SOUTHERN DIVISION SCOTT BRIAN MUDFORD, Plaintiff, Case No. 16-cv-10104 Hon. Matthew F. Leitman v. ELWOOD BROWN et al., Defendants. _________________________________/ ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANTS’ MOTIONS FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT (ECF #10, 11) In this action, Plaintiff Scott Brian Mudford (“Plaintiff”) alleges that the Defendants, including St. Clair County Probate Judge Elwood Brown, violated his constitutional rights, including “his right to self-preservation and the right to bear arms.” (See Compl., ECF #1 at 1, Pg. ID 1.) It appears that Plaintiff’s claims arise out of a custody hearing in the St. Clair County Probate Court. (See id.) Defendants moved for summary judgment on May 31 and June 1, 2016 (the “Motions”). (See ECF ## 10, 11.) On January 20, 2017, the assigned Magistrate Judge issued a Report and Recommendation recommending that the Court grant the Motions on the basis that each of the Defendants was entitled to judicial or quasi-judicial immunity (the “R&R”). (See ECF #17.) At the conclusion of the R&R, the Magistrate Judge 1 informed the parties that if they wanted to seek review of her recommendation, they needed to file specific objections with the Court within fourteen days. (See id. at 9-10, Pg. ID 242-43.) Plaintiff has not filed any objections to the R&R. The failure to file objections to an R&R 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 to an R&R releases the Court from its duty to independently review the matter. See Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140, 149 (1985). Accordingly, because Plaintiff has failed to file any objections to the R&R, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the Magistrate Judge’s recommendation to grant the Motions is ADOPTED. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Defendants’ Motions for Summary Judgment (ECF ## 10, 11) are GRANTED.         Dated: February 7, 2017     s/Matthew F. Leitman MATTHEW F. LEITMAN UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE I hereby certify that a copy of the foregoing document was served upon the parties and/or counsel of record on February 7, 2017, by electronic means and/or ordinary mail. s/Holly A. Monda Case Manager (313) 234-5113 2

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?