Walker v. Hunt et al

Filing 32

ORDER OVERRULING OBJECTION TO MAGISTRATE JUDGE'S ORDER DENYING REQUEST FOR AN EXPEDITED SPEARS HEARING re 17 MOTION for Review of Magistrate Judge Order. Signed by Chief District Judge Louis Guirola, Jr. on 6/21/2017 (wld)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF MISSISSIPPI
SOUTHERN DIVISION
DEMARIO DONTEZ WALKER, #L1625
v.

PLAINTIFF
CAUSE NO. 1:17CV27-LG-RHW

JOHNATHAN D. HUNT, et al.

DEFENDANTS

ORDER OVERRULING OBJECTION TO MAGISTRATE JUDGE’S ORDER
DENYING REQUEST FOR AN EXPEDITED SPEARS HEARING
BEFORE THE COURT is the [17] Appeal to U.S. District Court filed by
Plaintiff Demario Dontez Walker, who is proceeding pro se, with respect to the [11]
Order entered by United States Magistrate Judge Robert H. Walker denying
Plaintiff’s request for “an expedited Spears Hearing.” The Court has construed the
Appeal as an objection to the Magistrate Judge’s Order pursuant to Federal Rule of
Civil Procedure 72. Having reviewed the Magistrate Judge’s [11] Order and the
record in this matter, the Court is of the opinion that Plaintiff’s objection should be
overruled because the Order is not contrary to law or clearly erroneous.
When a Magistrate Judge decides a nondispositive pretrial matter, such as
Plaintiff’s request for an expedited Spears Hearing, “[a] party may serve and file
objections to the order within 14 days after being served with a copy.” Fed. R. Civ.
P. 72(a). This Court will then “consider timely objections and modify or set aside
any part of the order that is clearly erroneous or is contrary to law.” Id.; see also
Loc. Unif. Civ. R. 72(a). Plaintiff’s objection was timely, even though incorrectly
filed as an Appeal directed to this Court.
1

The Magistrate Judge found that Plaintiff’s request for a Spears hearing was
premature. (Order 1, ECF No. 11). Specifically, he stated that “[Plaintiff’s]
pleadings are subject to the screening provisions of the Prison Litigation Reform
Act, 28 U.S.C. § 1915. Upon completion of the initial screening process, the Court
will consider the matter of a Spears Hearing and determine how this case will
proceed.” (Id.). The Court is of the opinion that the Order is neither clearly
erroneous nor contrary to law.
IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that the [17] Appeal to
U.S. District Judge filed by Plaintiff Demario Dontez Walker, which the Court has
construed as an objection made pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 72, is
OVERRULED.
SO ORDERED AND ADJUDGED this the 21st day of June, 2017.

s/

Louis Guirola, Jr.

LOUIS GUIROLA, JR.
CHIEF U.S. DISTRICT JUDGE

2