Cox v. Whorton et al

Filing 35

ORDER ACCEPTING and ADOPTING in whole 25 Report and Recommendation, and DENYING Ps 26 Opposition. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED Ds 11 Motion to Dismiss is GRANTED as to 1. All claims against Ds Miller, McDaniel, MacArthur, Whorton, DAmico, Endel, and Tripp, including those in Counts V, VII, and VIII; 2. All claims brought against all remaining Ds in their official capacities for money damages;3. Count V - all claims against all Ds. These claims are barred by the doctrine of res judicata; and 4. Count VIII - Ps 8th Amendment claims against D Lemich with regard to the November 2, 2005 alleged denial of medical care. P failed to exhaust his administrative remedies. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Ds 11 Motion to Dismiss is DENIED as to: 1. Counts 1 and II; 2. Count VII - Ps claims against D Bishop; and 3. Count VIII - Ps 1st & 8th Amendment claims against D Lemich with regard to the July 26, 2006 alleged retaliatory denial of medical care. Clerk shall enter judgment accordingly. Signed by Judge Robert C. Jones on 10/29/2009. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - DRM) Modified on 10/30/2009 to correct re Count VIII notation (DRM).

- .- . . . . --

VL ? L E&WRL ' :

-. -. q kb o . R' ik l.

l
2 3

gygygjy,p g o gygi-y s kn y jj-j ë .
S( g ccy ) t /a r

OCï 2 9 ao

, j
5 6

n ? y

cg jy yy jy y y jy y qy y y ay y

/ / ;sbo I ppp z c F' . v ur L v

UNI ED STATES DI TRI T CO U RT T SC

7
8

DI TR I T O F NEVADA SC

9 STEVE MI HAEL COX, C
1 0 ll 13
l 4

Plitf, a n if v. Def ndant . e s

1 GLEN W HORTO N,etaI, 2 .

) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )

3: 8 CV- I - CJVPC) O - IOR I
ORDER

1 5

Be or t e Cour i Plit f O p ostont Magitat J dg ' Rep r (n Pariulr feh ts a n i' p i o fs i sr e u es ot I ta c

1 CountVI Isues)( 26)fld on May 13,2009.Thi ac in was r f red t U. .Magitat 6 1s # i e s to ee r o S sr e

1 J dgeValr P. 7u e i Cook pur u nt o28 U. . . 63 ( )1 ( )and LR I 14.The Magitat e e sa t S C j 6 b ( )B Bsr e 1 J dge s bm ied herRe od an Rec m m en a i n ( 25)onApr 30, 8u ut t p d o dt # o i 2009,r c m m en ig l eo dn
1 t att i Cour ent ran or ergr ntng i par denyi g i par Def ndant 'M oton t Dim is 9 h hs te d ai n t nn t e s i oss

2 ( 1 ) De en an s Res on e t Pl it f Obec in t Rep r an Re om m end t n ( 31 0 # 1 . f d t ' p s o a n i' j t o o t d c fs o ai # ) o
21 was fl d on M ay 29,2009. i e

22 23 A.

1 ANALYSI . S Revi w ofMagi tat Judge' Or er e sr e sd

2 4

Pu su n t 28 U. . .j 63 ( )1 ( )and LR I 3 2,a p d mayfl sp cfcwrt n r a to SC 6 b ( )B Bay i e ii ie e t

2 obec inst t e fn igsan r c m m en at n o a magitat j dg made pur u n t L 5 j t o h id n o deo d isf o sr e u e s a to R
26 I 1- . The dititcour m ustm ake a de nov det r i aton oft ose podi ns oft e B4 s rc t o em n i h o h
27 // /
28 // /

1 magitat j d e' r pod t whih obec in i ma e an ma ac ep ,rj c ,ormodi ,i sr e u g s e o c j t s d d y c t ee t o fn y 2 wh l ornp d,hefn igsorec m m enda in ma e b t emagitat j dge.LR I 3 2( ) oe i a t id n ro t s d yh o sr e u B - b.
3 De novo r viw m eans t e c ur m us consi ert e m ateranew ,t e same as i i had not ee h ot t dh t h ft 4 been hear bef r and as i no decii n pr vi usl had been r nder d. Ness v. d oe f so eo y e e

5 Commisin r 95 F.d 1 95,1 97 ( t Ci.1 9 ) Thu , t ou h t e dititc u n ed s o e, 4 2 4 4 9 h r 9 2 . s alh g h src o d e
6 nothol a de novo hearng, he cour' obl aton i t arie ati ow n idependentconcl si n d it t s i i s o rv g t s n uo

7 abouthosepodinsoft emagitat j dge' fndigsorr com m endatont w hihobectons t o h sr e u s i n e io c ji 8 ar made.Uni d St t s v.Remsic,874 F.d 614,617 ( t Ci.1989) e t e ae n 2 9h r .
9 Aferconductng a de novo r viw oft e r c r ,t e Cour accept and adopt t e t i ee h e od h t s sh

1 Ma ita e Ju g ' Mi ues o t e Cour ( 2 ) 0 g sr t d es n t f h t# 5 .
11 11 CONCLUSI N 1. O

1 2

I I HEREBY O RD ER ED t att e COUKACCEPTS and ADOPTS i whol t e Repod TS hh n eh

1 and RecommendatonofU. . stat Judge( 25) and Plitf' Opposiint Magitat 3 i S Magi r e #, a n ifs to o sr e

1 Ju g ' Rep d (n PariulrCou tVI Isu s)( 26)i DENI D. 4 d es oI ta c n Is e # s E 15 I I FURTHER ORDERED t atDef ndant ' i nt Dim is( 11)i GRANTED as TS h e s Moto o s s # s
16 t : o

17

1.

AIcl i s agai stdef ndant M ier M cD ani l M ac dhur W horon,D' m io, I am n e s l, l e, A , t Ac

18 Endeland Trpp,i cl di g t ose i Ccunt V,VI,and VII i nun h n s l I' ,
1 9 2. AIcl i s br ughtagai staIr m ai i g def ndan s i t ei oWii l I am o n Ie n n e t n h r c a capacii sf r te o

20 m oney damages' ,

21

3.

CcuntV - aI cl i s agai s aI def ndant . Thes cl i s ar bared by t e l am nt I e s e am e r h

2 docrn ofr sj dc t ' 2 tie e u ia a, and
23 4. Count ll Pl i tf' Ei ht Amendm entcl i sagai s def ndantLem i hwih v l- a n ifs g h am nt e ct

24 r gar t t e Novem ber2,2005 al ged deni lofm edi lc r . Pl i tf f i d t exhausthi e doh l e a a a e a n if a l o e s 25 adm i itatve r m edi s. ns r i e e
26 // /
27 // /
28 // /

I I FURTHER ORDERED t a Def n an s Mot n t Dim is( 11 i DENI D as TS h t e d t' i o s s # )s o E
C ount Iand l' s I , 2.
3.

e s, CountVl - Pl i tf' cl i s agai stdef ndantBihop'and l a n ifs a m n CountVll- Pl i tf s Fistand Ei ht Am endm entcl i s agai stdef ndant l a n ir r gh am n e

Lem i h wih r gar t t e Jul 26,2006 al ged r t l t r deni lofm edialcar . c t e doh y l e eai oy a a c e

The Cl r oft e Cour shalent rj dgm entaccor igl. ek h t l eu dn y
I I SO ORDERED. TS

DTDTi.Jdyfcbr09 AE:h f)! aoote. 0. s. o2
,
,

? y'A$. ,:
h h

L

Rober c.Jo es t U NI E D sTA E DI TR I T JUDG E T SC