Smart v. Kirkegard et al
ORDER ADOPTING 35 FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS; granting 28 Motion for Summary Judgment. Any appeal of this decision would not be taken in good faith. Signed by Judge Dana L. Christensen on 11/16/2017. Mailed to Smart (TAG)
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF MONTANA
FORREST SCOTT SMART,
LEROY KIRKEGARD, et al.,
United States Magistrate Judge John Johnston entered his Findings and
Recommendations in this case on October 4, 2017, recommending that
Defendants' Motion for Summary Judgment (Doc. 28) be granted and this matter
dismissed. Plaintiff Forrest Scott Smart did not timely object to the Findings and
Recommendations, and so has waived the right to de novo review thereof. 28
U.S.C. § 636(b)(l)(C). This Court reviews for clear error those findings and
recommendations to which no party objects. See McDonnell Douglas Corp. v.
Commodore Bus. Mach., Inc., 656 F.2d 1309, 1313 (9th Cir. 1981); Thomas v.
Arn, 474 U.S. 140, 149 (1985). Clear error exists if the Court is left with a
"definite and firm conviction that a mistake has been committed." United States v.
Syrax, 235 F.3d 422, 427 (9th Cir. 2000) (citations omitted).
After reviewing the record and finding no clear error,
IT IS ORDERED that Judge Johnston's Findings and Recommendations
(Doc. 35) are ADOPTED IN FULL. The Defendants' Motion for Summary
Judgment (Doc. 28) is GRANTED and this matter is DISMISSED.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Clerk of Court will close this matter
and enter judgment in favor of Defendants pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 58.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Clerk of Court shall ensure that the
docket reflects that the Court certifies pursuant to Rule 24(a)(3)(A) of the Federal
Rules of Appellate Procedure that any appeal of this decision would not be taken
in good faith. No reasonable person could suppose an appeal to be meritorious.
DATED this i tO .U,day of November,
Dana L. Christensen, Chief Judge
United States District Court
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?