King v. Norman et al

Filing 36

ORDER: The R & R (Docket No. 29 ) is hereby ACCEPTED and APPROVED; The Motions to Dismiss filed by Defendants Josh Hoeppner (Docket No. 19 ) and Candy Norman (Docket No. 21 ) are hereby GRANTED; and This case is hereby DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE. T he Clerk of the Court shall enter final judgment in accordance with Rule 58 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. It is SO ORDERED. Signed by Chief Judge Kevin H. Sharp on 12/17/15. (xc:Pro se party by regular and certified mail.)(DOCKET TEXT SUMMARY ONLY-ATTORNEYS MUST OPEN THE PDF AND READ THE ORDER.)(afs)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
MIDDLE DISTRICT OF TENNESSEE
NORTHEASTERN DIVISION
WILLIAM C. KING
Plaintiff,
v.
CANDY NORMAN, et al.

)
)
)
)
)
)

No. 2:14-0082
Judge Sharp

ORDER
Pending before the Court is a Report and Recommendation (“R & R”) (Docket No. 29) from
the Magistrate Judge recommending that Defendants’ Motions to Dismiss (Docket Nos. 19 & 21) be
granted and this case be dismissed with prejudice. Despite being informed that any Objections needed
to be filed within fourteen days, and despite the fact that Plaintiff was granted a thirty day extension
within which to file objections, none have been filed.
Having undertaken the de novo rule required by Rule 72 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure,
the Court agrees with the Magistrate Judge that dismissal is appropriate because a one-year statute of
limitations applies to claims brought in Tennessee under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Accordingly, the Court
rules as follows:
(1) The R & R (Docket No. 29) is hereby ACCEPTED and APPROVED;
(2) The Motions to Dismiss filed by Defendants Josh Hoeppner (Docket No. 19) and Candy
Norman (Docket No. 21) are hereby GRANTED; and
(3) This case is hereby DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE.
The Clerk of the Court shall enter final judgment in accordance with Rule 58 of the Federal
Rules of Civil Procedure.
It is SO ORDERED.
____________________________________
KEVIN H. SHARP
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE