Harris v. Sowers et al

Filing 163

ORDER ADOPTING the REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION 162 DENYING 142 Motion for Partial Summary Judgment, filed by Lionel Harris and DENYING IN PART AND GRANTING IN PART 139 Motion for Summary Judgment filed by Michelle Lovette, Melanie Fultz, Cynthia Ricker, McQueary, Hayes, Aaron Sowers, Chamberlain. Signed by Judge James L. Graham on 03/04/2020. (mdr)(This document has been sent by regular mail to the party(ies) listed in the NEF that did not receive electronic notification.)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO
EASTERN DIVISION
Lionel Harris,
Plaintiff,
v.

Case No. 2:16-cv-888

Aaron Sowers, et al.,
Defendants.
ORDER
Plaintiff Lionel Harris, an Ohio inmate formerly incarcerated
at the Madison Correctional Institution (“MaCI”), filed the instant
action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. §1983 against various MaCI employees,
specifically, Mailroom Screeners Aaron Sowers, Jacob Hays, and Mary
McCrary; Melanie Futz, a secretary/notary public; Lieutenant Julia
Chamberlin; Financial Associate Supervisor Cynthia Ricker; and
Cashier Michelle Lovette.
violated

his

Plaintiff alleged that the defendants

constitutional

rights

in

connection

with

their

handling of and alleged destruction or theft of his mail and that
they retaliated against him for his use and attempted use of the
prison grievance system.

On July 19, 2019, defendants filed a

second motion for summary judgment.

On July 24, 2019, plaintiff

filed a motion for partial summary judgment. On February 11, 2020,
the

magistrate

judge

issued

a

report

and

recommendation

recommending that plaintiff’s motion for partial summary judgment
be denied, and that defendants’ motion for summary judgment be
granted in part and denied in part.
The

report

objections

to

and

the

recommendation

report

and

advised

recommendation

the

parties

were

due

that

within

fourteen days, and that the failure to file objections to the

report and recommendation “will result in a waiver of the right to
de novo review by the District Judge and waiver of the right to
appeal the judgment of the District Court.
The

time

period

for

filing

objections

Doc. 162, pp. 71-72.
has

expired,

and

no

objections have been filed to the report and recommendation.
The court agrees with the recommendation of the magistrate
judge, and hereby adopts the report and recommendation (Doc. 162).
Plaintiff’s motion for partial summary judgment (Doc. 142) is
denied.

Defendants’ second motion for summary judgment (Doc. 139)

is granted in part and denied in part.

The defendants’ second

motion for summary judgment is granted as to:
1) First Cause of Action - denial of access to courts
claim against Lovette and Ricker
2) Second Cause of Action - retaliation claim against
Hays
3) Third Cause of Action - retaliation claim against
McCrary
4) Fourth Cause of Action - retaliation claim against
Ricker
5) Fifth Cause of Action - retaliation claim against
Chamberlin
6) Sixth Cause of Action - retaliation claim against
Sowers
7) Seventh Cause of Action - retaliation and denial of
access to courts claims against Sowers
8) Eighth Cause of Action - denial of access to courts
claim against Sowers
Defendant’s motion for summary judgment is denied as to:
1) First Cause of Action - retaliation claim against
Lovette and Ricker

2

2) Third Cause of Action - retaliation claim against
Chamberlin
3) Seventh Cause of Action - retaliation and denial of
access to courts claims against Fultz
4) Eighth Cause of Action - retaliation claim against
Sowers
The

remaining

pending

claims

are:

the

retaliation

claim

against Lovette and Ricker (First Cause of Action; the retaliation
claim against Chamberlin (Third Cause of Action); the retaliation
and denial of access claims against Fultz (Seventh Cause of
Action); the retaliation claim against Sowers (Eighth Cause of
Action) and the equal protection claims against Hays and Sowers
(Second, Seventh and Eighth Causes of Action).

Date: March 4, 2020

s/James L. Graham
James L. Graham
United States District Judge

3