Hazel v. Bell et al

Filing 119

MEMORANDUM ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS. The report of the Magistrate Judge is adopted as the opinion of the District Court. The pltf's 115 Motion for Reconsideration of the Final Judgment is DENIED. Signed by Judge Ron Clark on 8/12/10. (leh, )

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS LUFKIN DIVISION TERRENCE HAZEL v. OLIVER BELL, ET AL. § § § CIVIL ACTION NO. 9:08cv216

MEMORANDUM ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION OF THE UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE ON PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION The Plaintiff Terrence Hazel, proceeding pro se, filed this civil rights lawsuit under 42 U.S.C. §1983 complaining of alleged violations of his constitutional rights. This Court ordered that the matter be referred to the United States Magistrate Judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §636(b)(1) and (3) and the Amended Order for the Adoption of Local Rules for the Assignment of Duties to United States Magistrate Judges. Hazel challenged the conditions of confinement within the Texas Department of Criminal Justice, Correctional Institutions Division. The Magistrate Judge conducted an evidentiary hearing and ordered the Defendants to answer the lawsuit. On January 8, 2010, the Magistrate Judge issued a Report recommending that the Defendants' motion for summary judgment be granted and that the lawsuit be dismissed with prejudice. Hazel filed objections to the Report, but the Court determined after a de novo review that these had no merit. The lawsuit was dismissed on March 18, 2010. On March 29, 2010, Hazel filed a motion for reconsideration of the final judgment. On June 16, 2010, the Magistrate Judge issued a Report recommending that this motion be denied. Hazel did not object to this Report; instead, on June 24, 2010, he filed a "notice of intent to terminate proceedings." Because Hazel did not object to the Report, he is barred from de novo review by the district judge of those findings, conclusions, and recommendations and, except upon grounds of

1

plain error, from appellate review of the unobjected-to proposed factual findings and legal conclusions accepted and adopted by the district court. Douglass v. United Services Automobile Association, 79 F.3d 1415, 1430 (5th Cir. 1996) (en banc). The Court has reviewed the pleadings and the Report of the Magistrate Judge in this case and has determined that this Report is correct. It is accordingly ORDERED that the Report of the Magistrate Judge is hereby ADOPTED as the opinion of the District Court. It is further ORDERED that the Plaintiff's motion for reconsideration of the final judgment (docket no. 115) is hereby DENIED.

So ORDERED and SIGNED this 12 day of August, 2010.

___________________________________ Ron Clark, United States District Judge

2