Rogers v. Reed et al

Filing 52

ORDER ADOPTING 50 REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS, granting in part and denying in part 42 , 47 Motions for Summary Judgment. The malicious prosecution claim is STAYED. Signed by Judge Michael H. Watson on 7/13/2017. (ew)(This document has been sent by regular mail to the party(ies) listed in the NEF that did not receive electronic notification.)

Download PDF
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT "^ ^ SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO r EASTERN DIVISION 201] JUL 13 PHI2:3 Alterik Rogers, I m f M.9^ ..f'j I ' •. • . . Ij I i i:1m'i k' Plaintiff, V. i t. ilw ;; ,:^'nijS Case No. 2:14-cv-2750 Sgt. Manard Reed, ef al., Judge Michael H. Watson Defendants. Magistrate Judge Vascura ORDER On June 21, 2017, Magistrate Judge Kemp, to whom this case was referred. Issued a Report and Recommendation ("R&R") recommending the Court grant In part and deny In part Defendants' motion for summary judgment. R&R, EOF No. 50. The R&R advised the parties of their right to file objections to the same and specifically advised that the failure to timely object would result In a waiver of the right to de novo review by the Undersigned as well as a waiver of the right to appeal the decision of the District Court. Id. at 18. The time for filing objections has passed, and none were filed. Having received no objections, the Court ADOPTS the R&R and grants In part and denies In part summary judgment to Defendants. The Court denies summary judgment to Sgt. Reed and Officer Thompson on Plaintiffs excessive force claims against them In their Individual capacities and denies summary judgment to Sgt. Reed on Plaintiffs malicious prosecution claim against him In his individual capacity. The malicious prosecution claim is STAYED pending resolution of State v. Rogers, Jefferson County Case No. 14CR012. All other claims are dismissed. The Clerk shall terminate ECF Nos. 42 and 47. IT IS SO ORDERED. MICHAEL H. WATSON, JUDGE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT Case No. 2:14-cv-2750 Page 2 of 2

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?