Phillips v. Long et al

Filing 111

ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS - ACCORDINGLY, this 25th day of August, 2011, upon con. of the R&R of the mag. judge 107 , to which objs. were filed, & upon independent review of the record, it is ordered that: 1. The mag. judge's rep ort 107 is adopted. 2. Plf.'s objs. 108 109 are overruled. 3. The mtn. for SJ 82 filed by defts. Fogel, Showalter, & Wakefield is granted. 4. The mtn. for SJ 87 filed by defts. Beaven, who was subsequently dism'd from this case, & Long, who currently remains a party to this case is granted. 5. The Clerk of Crt. shall enter jgm. in favor of the defts. & against the plf. 6. The Clerk of Crt. shall close this file. (See order for complete details.) Signed by Honorable William W. Caldwell on 8/25/11. (am, )

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA

DAMIEN PHILLIPS,
Plaintiff

v.

RONALD LONG, MARY LOU
SHOWALTER, DAVID J. WAKEFIELD,
and ALAN B. FOGEL,
Defendants

:
:
:
:
: CIVIL NO. 4:09-CV-771
:
:
:
:
:
:

ORDER

The background of this order is as follows:
We are considering Magistrate Judge Smyser’s Report and
Recommendation (“R&R”) (Doc. 107), which recommends that we grant defendants’
motions for summary judgment (Docs. 82, 87). Plaintiff objects to the R&R, arguing that
we should reject Magistrate Judge Smyser’s conclusions and deny summary judgment.
Because plaintiff filed objections to the R&R, the Court must “make a de novo
determination of those portions of the report or specified proposed finding or
recommendations to which objection is made.” 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1).
Although we view the evidence in the light most favorable to plaintiff at this
procedural juncture, plaintiff’s arguments that sufficient evidence supports his 8th
Amendment claims, and that a reasonable jury could return a verdict in his favor, are
unconvincing. Magistrate Judge Smyser correctly applied the law to this case, and we

agree with his conclusion that defendants’ summary judgment motions should be
granted. Our reasoning mirrors that of the magistrate judge, and therefore, no further
comment is necessary.
ACCORDINGLY, this 25th day of August, 2011, upon consideration of the
report and recommendation of the magistrate judge (Doc. 107), to which objections were
filed, and upon independent review of the record, it is ordered that:
1. The magistrate judge’s report (Doc. 107) is adopted.
2. Plaintiff’s objections (Docs. 108-109) are overruled.
3. The motion for summary judgment (Doc. 82) filed by
defendants Fogel, Showalter, and Wakefield is granted.
4. The motion for summary judgment (Doc. 87) filed by defendants
Beaven, who was subsequently dismissed from this case, and Long, who
currently remains a party to this case, is granted.
5. The Clerk of Court shall enter judgment in favor of the
defendants and against the plaintiff.
6. The Clerk of Court shall close this file.

/s/ William W. Caldwell
William W. Caldwell
United States District Judge

2