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.)
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?