Watson et al v. Hortman et al
Filing
159
ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS for 138 Report and Recommendations. All claims by Plaintiffs in this matter are DENIED and this case is hereby DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE. Signed by Judge Rodney Gilstrap on 3/27/12. (ehs, )
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS
MARSHALL DIVISION
EMMA WATSON, individually and as next
friend of D.J. and W.B., ET AL.,
Plaintiffs,
v.
GREGORY HORTMAN, M.D., ET AL.,
Defendants.
§
§
§
§
§ CIVIL ACTION NO. 2:08-cv-81-JRG-RSP
§
§
§
ORDER
On March 12, 2009, Magistrate Judge Charles Everingham issued a Report and
Recommendation, urging this Court to grant-in-part and deny-in-part Defendants’ motions to
dismiss (Dkt. No. 66.) On March 31, 2009, the Court overruled the parties’ objections to the
Report and Recommendation (Dkt. No. 69), and on February 15, 2012, the Court denied
Plaintiffs’ Motion for Reconsideration (Dkt. No. 158.)
On September 13, 2010, Magistrate Judge Charles Everingham issued a Report and
Recommendation, urging this Court to deny Plaintiffs’ Motion for Summary Judgment and grant
Defendants’ Motion for Summary Judgment (Dkt. No. 138.) On September 27, 2010, Plaintiffs
filed objections to the same (Dkt. No. 142), to which Defendants’ response followed on October
29, 2010 (Dkt. No. 148.)
Upon considering the September 13 Report and Recommendation and the objections
thereto, the Court hereby OVERRULES such objections and ADOPTS the Report and
Recommendation in accordance with the reasons set forth in the same.
Accordingly, it is hereby ORDERED and ADJUDGED that all claims by Plaintiffs in this
matter are DENIED and this case is hereby DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE.
SIGNED this 19th day of December, 2011.
So ORDERED and SIGNED this 27th day of March, 2012.
____________________________________
RODNEY GILSTRAP
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
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?