Cummings v. Flint Police Department et al
Filing
46
ORDER Adopting 45 Report and Recommendation and Granting Defendants Motions 21 39 to Dismiss. Signed by District Judge David M. Lawson. (SPin)
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN
SOUTHERN DIVISION
JERRY L. CUMMINGS,
Plaintiff,
v.
Case Number 23-10514
Honorable David M. Lawson
Magistrate Judge Anthony P. Patti
FLINT POLICE DEPARTMENT, MICHAEL
TISDALE, JASON PLETCHER, and
DOUGLAS SANTIAGO,
Defendants.
________________________________________/
ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION AND
GRANTING DEFENDANTS’ MOTIONS TO DISMISS
Presently before the Court is the report issued on January 11, 2024 by Magistrate Judge
Kimberly G. Altman pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b) recommending that the Court grant the
defendants’ motions to dismiss, dismiss Counts I, II, and III of the complaint with prejudice, and
dismiss Counts IV and V without prejudice. The deadline for filing objections to the report has
passed, and no objections have been filed. The parties’ failure to file objections to the report and
recommendation waives any further right to appeal. Smith v. Detroit Fed’n 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 matter. Thomas v. Arn, 474
U.S. 140, 149 (1985). However, the Court agrees with the findings and conclusions of the
magistrate judge.
Accordingly, it is ORDERED that the report and recommendation (ECF No. 45) is
ADOPTED, and the defendants’ motions to dismiss (ECF No. 21, 39) is GRANTED.
It is further ORDERED that Counts I, II, and III of the complaint are DISMISSED WITH
PREJUDICE, and Counts IV and V are DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE.
s/David M. Lawson
DAVID M. LAWSON
United States District Judge
Dated: January 6, 2024
-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?