PIERCE EL-BEY v. CITY OF THOMASVILLE

Filing 79

ORDER signed by CHIEF JUDGE WILLIAM L. OSTEEN JR. on 9/30/2013; that the Magistrate Judge's Recommendation (Doc. 56 ) is ADOPTED. FURTHER that the Motion to Dismiss filed by Defendants NC Division of Motor Vehicle and Mike Roberts on (Doc. 9 ) is GRANTED, that the Motion to Dismiss filed by Defendants Marlene Hammond and Wayne L. Michael (Doc. 17 ) is GRANTED, and that the Motion to Dismiss filed by Defendants City of Thomasville, the City of Thomasville Police Department, and C.S. Leonard (Doc. 24 ) is GRANTED with the sole exception that additional briefing is allowed as to Plaintiff's claim of a Fourth Amendment violation based upon Defendant Leonard's search of Plaintiff's vehicle. FURTHER that Plaintiff's Motion for Summary Judgment (Doc. 37 ) and Plaintiff's Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings (Doc. 39 ) are DENIED. (Sheets, Jamie)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA

TORNELLO FONTAINE
PIERCE EL-BEY,
Plaintiff,
v.
CITY OF THOMASVILLE, WAYNE I.
MICHAEL, CITY OF THOMASVILLE
POLICE DEP’T, MARLENE
HAMMOND, C.S. LEONARD,
NC DIVISION OF MOTOR VEHICLE,
and MICHAEL/MIKE ROBERTSON,
Defendants.

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

1:11CV413

ORDER
This matter is before this court for review of the
Memorandum Opinion, Order and Recommendation (ARecommendation@)
filed on March 30, 2012, by the Magistrate Judge in accordance
with 28 U.S.C. § 636(b).

(Doc. 56.)

In the Recommendation, the

Magistrate Judge recommends that the Motion to Dismiss filed by
Defendants NC Division of Motor Vehicle and Mike Robertson (Doc.
9) be granted, that the Motion to Dismiss filed by Defendants
Marlene Hammond and Wayne L. Michael (Doc. 17) be granted, and
that the Motion to Dismiss filed by Defendants City of
Thomasville, the City of Thomasville Police Department, and C.S.

Leonard (Doc. 24), be granted with the sole exception that
additional briefing should be allowed as to Plaintiff’s claim of
a Fourth Amendment violation based upon Defendant Leonard’s
search of Plaintiff’s vehicle.

The Magistrate Judge further

recommends that Plaintiff’s Motion for Summary Judgment (Doc.
37) and Plaintiff’s Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings (Doc.
39) be denied.
The Recommendation was served on the parties to this action
on April 2, 2012.

Plaintiff filed an Affidavit of Truth (Doc.

58) which will be construed as objections to the Recommendation.
This court is required to Amake a de novo determination of
those portions of the [Magistrate Judge=s] report or specified
proposed findings or recommendations to which objection is made.@
28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1).

This court Amay accept, reject, or

modify, in whole or in part, the findings or recommendations
made by the [M]agistrate [J]udge. . . . [O]r recommit the matter
to the [M]agistrate [J]udge with instructions.@

Id.

This court has appropriately reviewed the portions of the
Recommendation to which objection was made and has made a
de novo determination which is in accord with the Magistrate
Judge’s Recommendation.

This court therefore adopts the

Recommendation.

- 2 -

IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that the Magistrate Judge=s
Recommendation (Doc. 56) is ADOPTED.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that

the Motion to Dismiss filed by Defendants NC Division of Motor
Vehicle and Mike Robertson (Doc. 9) is GRANTED, that the Motion
to Dismiss filed by Defendants Marlene Hammond and Wayne L.
Michael (Doc. 17) is GRANTED, and that the Motion to Dismiss
filed by Defendants City of Thomasville, the City of Thomasville
Police Department, and C.S. Leonard (Doc. 24) is GRANTED with
the sole exception that additional briefing is allowed as to
Plaintiff’s claim of a Fourth Amendment violation based upon
Defendant Leonard’s search of Plaintiff’s vehicle.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Plaintiff’s Motion for Summary
Judgment (Doc. 37) and Plaintiff’s Motion for Judgment on the
Pleadings (Doc. 39) are DENIED.
This the 30th day of September, 2013.

________________________________________
United States District Judge

- 3 -