McCort v. Muskingum County et al
ORDER ADOPTING and AFFIRMING the REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION 25 in that 15 Defendant Love's Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings and Motion to Stay Discovery are GRANTED and Plaintiff's Discovery Motions are DENIED AS MOOT. Signed by Judge George C. Smith on 4/12/18. (sem)(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
Case No.: 2:17-cv-620
JUDGE GEORGE C. SMITH
Magistrate Judge Jolson
MUSKINGUM COUNTY, et al.,
On January 30, 2018, the United States Magistrate Judge issued a Report and
Recommendation and Order recommending that Defendant Love’s Motion for Judgment on the
Pleadings and Motion to Stay Discovery be granted and Plaintiff’s discovery motions be denied
as moot. (See Report and Recommendation and Order, Doc. 25). The parties were advised of
their right to object to the Report and Recommendation and Order. This matter is now before
the Court on Plaintiff’s Objections to the Report and Recommendation. (See Doc. 28).
Defendant has responded in opposition and Plaintiff has replied. (Docs. 29 and 30).1 The Court
will consider the matter de novo. See 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1); Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b)(3).
Plaintiff’s objections present, once again, the issues presented to and considered by the
Magistrate Judge in the Report and Recommendation and Order. Specifically, Plaintiff
continues to argue that Defendant Love conspired with the other Defendants “to make the
original assault worse by allowing him to remain in a state of extreme pain.” (Doc. 28, Pl.’s
Defendant asserts that Plaintiff’s objections should be denied as untimely because they were filed 3 days late.
Plaintiff responds that the prison inspection system caused a delay in mailing. The Court finds that this delay is
excusable and will therefore consider Plaintiff’s objections.
Objs. at 3). Defendant Love responds that Plaintiff’s Complaint fails to allege specific claims
against him and again, in his objections, he fails to cite to claims in the record that would
withstand a motion for judgment on the pleadings. The Court agrees with the Magistrate Judge’s
conclusion that Plaintiff “fails to plead factual content that would allow the reasonable inference
that Defendant Love is liable for the misconduct alleged.” (Doc. 25 at 5).
Therefore, for the reasons stated in the Report and Recommendation and Order, this
Court finds that Plaintiff’s objections are without merit and are hereby OVERRULED.
The Report and Recommendation and Order, ECF No. 25, is ADOPTED and
AFFIRMED. Defendant Love’s Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings and Motion to Stay
Discovery are hereby GRANTED and Plaintiff’s discovery motions are DENIED AS MOOT.
The Clerk shall remove Documents 15, 25, and 28 from the Court’s pending motions list.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
/s/ George C. Smith__________________
GEORGE C. SMITH, JUDGE
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
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?