Noland v. Garfield County Detention Center Authority et al

Filing 101

ORDER ADOPTING 96 Report and Recommendation, DEEMING MOOT 73 Motion to Dismiss Plaintiff's Amended Complaint filed by Steve Hobson, Scott Savage, Garfield County Board of County Commissioners, Michael Postier, GRANTING with respect to plf� 39;s 42 USC 1983 claims on grounds that plf has failed to exhaust his administrative remedies pursuant to 42 USC 1997e(a) 81 Motion for Summary Judgment filed by Misty Taylor, Dorothy Tabor, GRANTING with respect to plf's 42 USC 1983 claims on grounds that plf has failed to exhaust his administrative remedies as required by 42 USC 1997e(a) 82 Motion for Summary Judgment filed by Bill Winchester, Jerry E Miles, GRANTING with respect to plf's 42 USC 1983 claims 83 Motion for Summar y Judgment filed by Steve Hobson, Scott Savage, Michael Postier, DENYING 88 Motion to Amend Amended Complaint and Add Parties filed by Christopher Edward Noland, DENYING 89 Motion for Appointment of Counsel filed by Christopher Edward Noland, DIMISSING WITHOUT PREJUDICE any remaining state law claims. Signed by Honorable Stephen P. Friot on 12/15/09. (llg)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF OKLAHOMA CHRISTOPHER EDWARD NOLAND, ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) -vs) ) GARFIELD COUNTY DETENTION ) CENTER, et al., ) ) Defendants. ) ORDER United States Magistrate Judge Valerie K. Couch issued a Supplemental Report and Recommendation on September 29, 2009, wherein she recommended that (1) summary judgment be entered in favor of defendants Misty Taylor, Dorothy Tabor, Bill Winchester and Jerry Niles as to plaintiff's 42 U.S.C. § 1983 claims on grounds that plaintiff failed to exhaust administrative remedies as required by 42 U.S.C. § 1997e(a); (2) summary judgment be entered in favor of defendants Board of County Commissioners of Garfield County, Steve Hobson, Michael Postier, and Scott Savage as to plaintiff's 42 U.S.C. § 1983 claims on various grounds; (3) the dismissal motion of defendants Board of County Commissioners of Garfield County, Hobson, Postier, and Savage be deemed moot, as superseded by their summary judgment motion; (4) the exercise of supplemental jurisdiction be declined over any state law claims brought by plaintiff; and (5) plaintiff's motion to amend the complaint and motion for appointment of counsel be denied. After granting plaintiff an extension of time to file an objection to the Supplemental Report and Recommendation, plaintiff filed Plaintiff's Objections to the Findings and Recommendation of the Magistrate on November 30, 2009. Pursuant

Case No. CIV-07-494-F

to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1), the court has conducted a de novo review of the matter. Having done so, the court concurs with Magistrate Judge Couch's analysis and recommendations. The court finds plaintiff's objections to be without merit. Therefore, the court accepts, adopts, and affirms the Supplemental Report and Recommendation in its entirety. IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that 1. The Supplemental Report and Recommendation issued by United States Magistrate Judge Valerie K. Couch issued September 29, 2009 (doc. no. 96) is ACCEPTED, ADOPTED, and AFFIRMED. 2. Defendants State of Oklahoma, ex rel. Board of County Commissioners of Garfield County - Steve Hobson, Michael Postier, and Scott Savage's Motion to Dismiss Plaintiff's Amended Complaint, filed January 5, 2009 (doc. no. 73), is DEEMED MOOT. 3. Defendants Misty Taylor and Dorothy Tabor's Motion for Summary Judgment, filed April 7, 2009 (doc. no. 81), is GRANTED with respect to plaintiff's 42 U.S.C. § 1983 claims on grounds that plaintiff has failed to exhaust his administrative remedies pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1997e(a). 4. Defendants Bill Winchester and Jerry Niles' Motion for Summary Judgment, filed April 7, 2009 (doc. no. 82), is GRANTED with respect to plaintiff's 42 U.S.C. § 1983 claims on grounds that plaintiff has failed to exhaust his administrative remedies as required by 42 U.S.C. § 1997e(a). 5. Defendants Hobson, Postier, and Savage's Motion for Summary Judgment, filed April 7, 2009 (doc. no. 83), is GRANTED with respect to plaintiff's 42 U.S.C. § 1983 claims.

2

6.

Plaintiff's Motion to Amend Amended Complaint and Add Parties, filed

April 29, 2009 (doc. no. 88), and Plaintiff's Motion for Appointment of Counsel, filed April 29, 2009 (doc. no. 89), are DENIED. 7. As to any remaining state law claims, the court, in its discretion and pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1367(c)(3), declines to exercise supplemental jurisdiction over the state law claims and DISMISSES WITHOUT PREJUDICE the state law claims. 8. Judgment shall issue forthwith. DATED December 15, 2009.

07-0494p007.wpd

3