Tabor v. Worley et al
Filing
39
ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS: The Court has reviewed the R&R and agrees with the Magistrate Judge's analysis and reasoning for her recommended disposition. Accordingly, the R&R (Doc. No. 38 ) is APPROVED AND ADOPTED, and Defendant Cox's Motion for Summary Judgment (Doc. No. 25 ) is GRANTED. This is a final order. The Clerk shall close the case. Signed by District Judge Waverly D. Crenshaw, Jr on 3/12/2025. (xc: Pro se party by regular mail.) (DOCKET TEXT SUMMARY ONLY-ATTORNEYS MUST OPEN THE PDF AND READ THE ORDER.)(sb)
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
MIDDLE DISTRICT OF TENNESSEE
NORTHEASTERN DIVISION
JEFFREY LYNN TABOR,
Plaintiff,
v.
AMANDA WORLEY, et al.,
Defendants.
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
No. 2:23-cv-00008
ORDER
On February 19, 2025, the Magistrate Judge issued a Report and Recommendation
(“R&R”) (Doc. No. 38) recommending that the Court grant Cumberland County Sheriff Casey
Cox’s Motion for Summary Judgment because Cox is entitled to qualified immunity. (Id. at 1, 6,
13). Plaintiff Jeffrey Lynn Tabor, proceeding pro se, has not filed any objections to the R&R,
despite the R&R’s specific warnings regarding waiver. The absence of any objections relieves the
Court from engaging in de novo review. See Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140, 150 (1985) (“It does
not appear that Congress intended to require district court review of a [magistrate judge’s] factual
or legal conclusions, under a de novo or any other standard, when neither party objects to those
findings.”). The Court has reviewed the R&R and agrees with the Magistrate Judge’s analysis and
reasoning for her recommended disposition. Accordingly, the R&R (Doc. No. 38) is APPROVED
AND ADOPTED, and Defendant Cox’s Motion for Summary Judgment (Doc. No. 25) is
GRANTED. This is a final order. The Clerk shall close the case.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
____________________________________
WAVERLY D. CRENSHAW, JR.
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
2
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?