Carroll et al v. Fentress Co Sheriff Depart. et al

Filing 87

ORDER: The Report and Recommendation 66 and the Report and Recommendation 67 are hereby ACCEPTED and APPROVED. Defendant Smith's Motion to Dismiss 28 is hereby DENIED. The joint Motion to Dismiss filed by Defendants Fentress County Sheriff 's Office and Wasik 29 is hereby GRANTED as to Defendant Fentress County Sheriff's Office but DENIED as to Defendant Wasik. Within 21 days of the date of entry of this Order, Defendant Smith shall inform the Court as to whether she waives service of process, or advise the Court as to when and where she can be served by the Marshals Service. The Clerk of the Court shall provide the Marshals service with a copy of this Order and the Complaint and summons so that the Marshals Service can effect personal service on Defendant Wasik. Signed by District Judge Kevin H. Sharp on 3/12/12. (xc:Pro se party by regular and certified mail.)(dt)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
MIDDLE DISTRICT OF TENNESSEE
NORTHEASTERN DIVISION
JOSHUA LEE CARROLL, et al.,
Plaintiffs,
v.
FENTRESS COUNTY SHERIFF’S
DEPARTMENT, et al.,
Defendants.

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

No. 2:11-0019
Judge Sharp

ORDER
In this case brought by two inmates at the Fentress County Jail, the Magistrate Judge has
entered a Report and Recommendation (“R & R”) (Docket No. 66), recommending that the Motion
to Dismiss filed by Defendant Evelyn Faye Smith (“Smith”) (Docket No. 28) be denied. The
Magistrate Judge has entered a separate R & R (Docket No. 67), recommending that the joint
Motion to Dismiss filed by Defendants Fentress County Sheriff’s Department and Laurel Wasik
(“Wasik”) (Docket No. 29) be granted as to the Fentress County Sheriff’s Department, but denied
as to Wasik.
The Magistrate Judge further recommends that the Court provide both Smith and Wasik
twenty-one (21) days within which to inform the Court whether those Defendants waive service of
process, or advise the Court when and where each individual Defendant can be served, so that the
Marshals Service can effect personal service. No objections have been filed to either R & R,
although counsel for Fentress County has informed the Court that Wasik is no longer employed with
Fentress County and, “[a]s such, counsel has been unable to get consent to waive service.” (Docket
No. 78 at 1).
1

Having conducted a de novo review of the matter in accordance with Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b),
the Court agrees with the Magistrate Judge’s recommendations. Accordingly,
(1) The Report and Recommendation (Docket No. 66) and the Report and Recommendation
(Docket Entry No. 67) are hereby ACCEPTED and APPROVED;
(2) Defendant Smith’s Motion to Dismiss (Docket No. 28) is hereby DENIED;
(3) The joint Motion to Dismiss filed by Defendants Fentress County Sheriff’s Office and
Wasik (Docket No. 29) is hereby GRANTED as to Defendant Fentress County Sheriff’s Office but
DENIED as to Defendant Wasik;
(4) Within 21 days of the date of entry of this Order, Defendant Smith shall inform the Court
as to whether she waives service of process, or advise the Court as to when and where she can be
served by the Marshal’s Service;
(5) The Clerk of the Court shall provide the Marshal’s service with a copy of this Order and
the Complaint and summons so that the Marshal’s Service can effect personal service on Defendant
Wasik.
It is SO ORDERED.

____________________________________
KEVIN H. SHARP
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

2