Quinn v. Guerrero et al

Filing 112

MEMORANDUM ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS OF THE UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE, AND ORDER DENYING MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION for, 106 Report and Recommendation, 107 Report and Recommendation, 75 Motion to Dismiss filed by Aaron Smith , Donnie Williams, Joel Purser, Jason Norton, Jesus Damian Guerrero, 91 Motion to Dismiss, filed by Aaron Smith, Donnie Williams, Joel Purser, Jason Norton, City of McKinney, Texas, Rex Redden, Jesus Damian Guerrero, 110 Motion for Reconsideration filed by John Gerard Quinn, 74 Motion to Dismiss filed by City of McKinney, Texas, 79 Motion to Dismiss filed by Aaron Smith, Donnie Williams, Joel Purser, Jason Norton, Rex Redden, Jesus Damian Guerrero. As to Plainti ff's motion for reconsideration, it (Dkt. 110) is DENIED. Defendants Jesus Damian Guerrero, Rex Redden, Jason Norton, Donnie Williams, Aaron Smith, Joel Purser, and Doe Defendant's Motion to Dismiss the Individual Defendants Based on the Statute of Limitations (Dkt. 75) is GRANTED, and Plaintiff's claims against Jesus Damian Guerrero, Rex Redden, Aaron Smith, Donnie Williams, Jason Norton, Joel Purser and Doe Defendant are dismissed with prejudice. Defendants' Motion to Dismiss Based on Res Judicata (Dkt. 79) and Motion to Dismiss Based on Heck v. Humphrey and Qualified Immunity (Dkt. 91) as to those officer defendants are DENIED as MOOT. Further, Defendant City of McKinney, Texas' Motion to Dismiss Plaintiff's Claims (Dkt. 74) is GRANTED and Plaintiff's claims against the City of McKinney are dismissed with prejudice. Signed by Judge Richard A. Schell on 8/26/2016. (kls, )

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS
SHERMAN DIVISION
JOHN GERARD QUINN,
Plaintiff,
v.
JESUS DAMIAN GUERRERO, et al.,
Defendants.

§
§
§
§
§
§
§
§
§

CASE NO. 4:09CV166

MEMORANDUM ADOPTING REPORTS AND
RECOMMENDATIONS OF THE UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE AND
ORDER DENYING MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION
Came on for consideration the reports of the United States Magistrate Judge in this action,
this matter having been heretofore referred to the United States Magistrate Judge pursuant to 28
U.S.C. § 636.
On August 4, 2016, the report of the Magistrate Judge was entered containing proposed
findings of fact and recommendations that Defendants Jesus Damian Guerrero, Rex Redden, Jason
Norton, Donnie Williams, Aaron Smith, Joel Purser, and Doe Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss the
Individual Defendants Based on the Statute of Limitations (Dkt. 75) should be GRANTED, that
Plaintiff’s claims against Jesus Damian Guerrero, Rex Redden, Aaron Smith, Donnie Williams,
Jason Norton, Joel Purser and Doe Defendant should be dismissed with prejudice, and that
Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss Based on Res Judicata (Dkt. 79) and Motion to Dismiss Based on
Heck v. Humphrey and Qualified Immunity (Dkt. 91) as to those officer defendants should be
DENIED as MOOT. See Dkt. 106.

1

On August 9, 2016, the report of the Magistrate Judge was entered containing proposed
findings of fact and recommendations that Defendant City of McKinney, Texas’ Motion to Dismiss
Plaintiff’s Claims (Dkt. 74) should be GRANTED and that Plaintiff’s claims against the City of
McKinney should be dismissed. See Dkt. 107.
Plaintiff has filed objections to both of the Magistrate Judge’s reports (see Dkts. 109 & 111).
Plaintiff has also filed a Motion for Reconsideration or, in the Alternative, for Leave to File
Interlocutory Appeal (Dkt. 110). In his motion, Plaintiff seeks reconsideration of an October 30,
2008 order entered by the state court prior to the removal of this case and relied upon by the
Magistrate Judge in his recommendations. Plaintiff argues that the state court misinterpreted
controlling Texas law and that the state court either interpreted the Texas Tort Claims Act in an
unconstitutional manner or that the state statute is unconstitutional on its face.
The court has made a de novo review of the objections raised by Plaintiff and is of the
opinion that the findings and conclusions of the Magistrate Judge in his reports and
recommendations regarding the motions to dismiss are correct. Plaintiff’s objections re-urge
arguments which were fully briefed and considered by the Magistrate Judge. The Magistrate Judge’s
analysis is detailed and supported by authority, and Plaintiff’s objections are without merit as to the
ultimately recommendations. Therefore, the court hereby adopts the findings and conclusions of the
Magistrate Judge as the findings and conclusions of this court.
As to Plaintiff’s motion for reconsideration, it (Dkt. 110) is DENIED. The record in this suit
contains significant briefing and analysis regarding the October 30, 2008 order entered by the state
court and Plaintiff’s challenges, including his claims of unconstitutionality, are brought too late to

2

warrant re-consideration by this court. The Magistrate Judge’s analysis of the state court order is
supported by applicable authority and the court has adopted the Magistrate Judge’s analysis in full
herein. Further, because the court is disposing of Plaintiff’s claims in their entirety, there is no need
for an interlocutory appeal and that alternative request is therefore denied as moot.
Defendants Jesus Damian Guerrero, Rex Redden, Jason Norton, Donnie Williams, Aaron
Smith, Joel Purser, and Doe Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss the Individual Defendants Based on the
Statute of Limitations (Dkt. 75) is GRANTED, and Plaintiff’s claims against Jesus Damian
Guerrero, Rex Redden, Aaron Smith, Donnie Williams, Jason Norton, Joel Purser and Doe
Defendant are dismissed with prejudice. Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss Based on Res Judicata
(Dkt. 79) and Motion to Dismiss Based on Heck v. Humphrey and Qualified Immunity (Dkt. 91) as
to those officer defendants are DENIED as MOOT. Further, Defendant City of McKinney, Texas’
Motion to Dismiss Plaintiff’s Claims (Dkt. 74) is GRANTED and Plaintiff’s claims against the City
of McKinney are dismissed with prejudice.
IT IS SO ORDERED.

.

SIGNED this the 26th day of August, 2016.

_______________________________
RICHARD A. SCHELL
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

3