Gooden v. Vess et al

Filing 24

ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS 22 - IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Magistrate Judge Michael T. Parker's Report and Recommendation (docket entry 27 in Gooden v. Patton, 5:16-cv-92-DCB-MTP; docket entry 22 in Gooden v. Patton, 5:16-cv-93-DCB-MTP) is ADOPTED as the findings and conclusions of this Court; FURTHER ORDERED that the plaintiff's Motion to Dismiss (docket entry 24 in Gooden v. Patton, 5:16-cv-92-DCB-MTP), Amended Motion to Dismiss (docket entry 2 6 in Gooden v. Patton, 5:16-cv-92-DCB-MTP), and Amended Motion to Dismiss (docket entry 23 in Gooden v. Patton, 5:16-cv-93-DCB-MTP) are GRANTED; FURTHER ORDERED that all claims asserted in Gooden v. Patton, 5:16-cv-92-DCB-MTP and Gooden v. Patton, 5:16-cv-93-DCB-MTP are dismissed without prejudice. A final judgment dismissing the cases without prejudice will follow in accordance with Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 58. Signed by Honorable David C. Bramlette, III on 8/14/2017 (ND)

Download PDF
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF MISSISSIPPI WESTERN DIVISION TERRY GOODEN PLAINTIFF v. CIVIL ACTION NO. 5:16-cv-92-DCB-MTP SHERIFF TRAVIS PATTON DEFENDANT consolidated with TERRY GOODEN PLAINTIFF v. CIVIL ACTION NO. 5:16-cv-93-DCB-MTP SHERIFF TRAVIS PATTON DEFENDANT ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION This cause is before the Court on Magistrate Judge Michael T. Parker’s Report and Recommendation (docket entry 27 in Gooden v. Patton, 5:16-cv-92-DCB-MTP; docket entry 22 in Gooden v. Patton, 5:16-cv-93-DCB-MTP), to which no objections have been filed.1 Having carefully reviewed the same, the Court finds that the Report and Recommendation is well-taken and should be adopted. Shortly after the Court scheduled an omnibus hearing for the above styled cases, Plaintiff Terry Gooden (“Gooden”) filed two motions to dismiss in Gooden v. Patton, 5:16-cv-92-DCB-MTP. See Docs. 24, 26.2 Within his motions to dismiss, Gooden states that he does not wish to represent himself and requests that both of The Court consolidated the above styled cases on June 14, 2017. Gooden’s amended motion to dismiss (docket entry 26) was also filed in Gooden v. Patton, 5:16-cv-93-DCB-MTP (docket entry 23). Though the amended motion appears to have been entered on the docket in Gooden v. Patton, 5:16cv-93-DCB-MTP after the Report and Recommendation, the Court observes that Gooden’s motion is a copy of the second motion to dismiss filed in Gooden v. Patton, 5:16-cv-92-DCB-MTP, which Judge Parker considered in making his report. 1 2 his cases be dismissed. Id. desires to voluntarily Having found that the plaintiff dismiss his pending actions without objection from the defendant, the Court adopts the Report and Recommendation and shall grant the plaintiff’s motions to dismiss, hereby dismissing all claims asserted in Gooden v. Patton, 5:16cv-92-DCB-MTP and Gooden v. Patton 5:16-cv-93-DCB-MTP without prejudice. Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Magistrate Judge Michael T. Parker’s Report and Recommendation (docket entry 27 in Gooden v. Patton, 5:16-cv-92-DCB-MTP; docket entry 22 in Gooden v. Patton, 5:16-cv93-DCB-MTP) is ADOPTED as the findings and conclusions of this Court; FURTHER ORDERED that the plaintiff’s Motion to Dismiss (docket entry 24 in Gooden v. Patton, 5:16-cv-92-DCB-MTP), Amended Motion to Dismiss (docket entry 26 in Gooden v. Patton, 5:16-cv92-DCB-MTP), and Amended Motion to Dismiss (docket entry 23 in Gooden v. Patton, 5:16-cv-93-DCB-MTP) are GRANTED; FURTHER ORDERED that all claims asserted in Gooden v. Patton, 5:16-cv-92-DCB-MTP and Gooden v. Patton, 5:16-cv-93-DCB-MTP are dismissed without prejudice. A final judgment dismissing the cases without prejudice will follow in accordance with Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 58. SO ORDERED, this the 14th day of August, 2017. /s/ David Bramlette_________ UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

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?