Thompson v. Spurgeon et al

Filing 42

ORDER: Accordingly, the Court hereby rules as follows: (1) The Report and Recommendation 39 is hereby ACCEPTED and APPROVED; (2) Defendants' Robert Spurgeon and Gayla Gibbs Motion for Summary Judgment 24 is hereby GRANTED; (3) This case is hereby DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE; and (4) Any appeal shall NOT be certified under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3) as taken in good faith. The Clerk is directed to enter Judgment in a separate document in accordance with Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 58. It is SO ORDERED. Signed by District Judge Kevin H. Sharp on 5/8/14. (xc:Pro se party by regular and certified mail.)(DOCKET TEXT SUMMARY ONLY-ATTORNEYS MUST OPEN THE PDF AND READ THE ORDER.)(tmw)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
MIDDLE DISTRICT OF TENNESSEE
NASHVILLE DIVISION
ROBERT L. THOMPSON, JR.,
Plaintiff,
v.
ROBERT SPURGEON, et al.,
Defendants.

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

No. 3:13-cv-0526
Judge Sharp
Magistrate Judge Griffin

ORDER
Pending before the Court is a Report and Recommendation (“R & R”) of the Magistrate
Judge, recommending that Defendants’ Robert Spurgeon and Gayla Gibbs Motion for Summary
Judgment (Docket Entry No. 24) be granted and the case be dismissed with prejudice. The R &
R provides, in part,
Although the plaintiff’s allegations were sufficient to state a claim for relief
permitting the case to survive frivolity review under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(d), at this
stage of the proceedings and when challenged upon a motion for summary
judgment, there is insufficient evidence before the Court upon which a reasonable
jury could find in favor of the plaintiff on this claim. Summary judgment should
be granted to the Defendants.
***
What happened to the plaintiff was unfortunate and regrettable and may not have
occurred had the actors involved, including both the plaintiff and the Defendants,
taken different actions, but there is simply no evidence before the Court
supporting a claim that the Plaintiff’s constitutional rights were violated. See
Hartsfield v. Vidor, 199 F.3d 305, 309 (6th Cir. 1999). Given the undisputed
evidence that is before the Court, no reasonable jury could find in favor of the
plaintiff.
Because the Court finds insufficient evidence to support a constitutional claim, it
is unnecessary to address the Defendants’ alternative arguments for summary
judgment.
(Docket Entry No. 39). No objections were made to the R & R.
1

Where no objections are made to the R & R, “[t]he district judge may accept, reject, or
modify the recommended disposition; receive further evidence; or return the matter to the
magistrate judge with instructions.” Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b). Having thoroughly reviewed the
record in this case and the applicable law in accordance with Rule 72(b), the Court will accept
the R & R.
Accordingly, the Court hereby rules as follows:
(1) The Report and Recommendation (Docket Entry No. 39) is hereby ACCEPTED and
APPROVED;
(2) Defendants’ Robert Spurgeon and Gayla Gibbs Motion for Summary Judgment
(Docket Entry No. 24) is hereby GRANTED;
(3) This case is hereby DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE; and
(4) Any appeal shall NOT be certified under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3) as taken in good
faith.
The Clerk is directed to enter Judgment in a separate document in accordance with
Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 58.
It is SO ORDERED.

_________________________________________
KEVIN H. SHARP
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

2