Clark v. Corrections Corporation of America et al

Filing 71

ORDER: The R & R (Doc. No. 70) is ADOPTED. Defendants' Motion to Dismiss (Doc. No. 65) is GRANTED. Defendants' Motion to Compel (Doc. No. 68) is DENIED AS MOOT. This case is DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE. Signed by Chief Judge Waverly D. Crenshaw, Jr on 8/10/2017. (xc:Pro se party by regular mail. ) (DOCKET TEXT SUMMARY ONLY-ATTORNEYS MUST OPEN THE PDF AND READ THE ORDER.)(jw)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
MIDDLE DISTRICT OF TENNESSEE
COLUMBIA DIVISION
TAMIR CLARK #421853,
Plaintiff,
v.
CORRECTIONS CORPORATION OF
AMERICA, et al.,
Defendants.

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

No. 1:16-cv-00037
Chief Judge Crenshaw

ORDER
The Magistrate Judge has issued a Report and Recommendation (“R & R”) (Doc. No. 70)
recommending that Defendants’ unopposed Motion to Dismiss (Doc. No. 65) be granted. No
objections have been filed to the R & R.
Having undertaken de novo review in accordance with Rule 72(b) of the Federal Rules of
Civil Procedure, the Court agrees with the recommended disposition because Plaintiff’s “Amended
and Supplemental Complaint” fails to allege that the individual Defendants engaged in conduct that
violated Plaintiff’s constitutional rights, or that an official policy or custom existed so as to hold the
corporate Defendant liable.
Accordingly, the Court rules as follows:
(1) The R & R (Doc. No. 70) is ADOPTED;
(2) Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss (Doc. No. 65) is GRANTED;
(3) Defendants’ Motion to Compel (Doc. No. 68) is DENIED AS MOOT; and
(3) This case is DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE.
The Clerk of the Court shall enter final judgment in accordance with Rule 58 of the Federal
1

Rules of Civil Procedure.
IT IS SO ORDERED.

__________________________________________
WAVERLY D. CRENSHAW, JR.
CHIEF UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

2