Mitchell v. Scott et al
ORDER OVERRULING OBJECTIONS AND ADOPTING 3 REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS. Signed by Judge Thad Heartfield on 8/4/14. (ljw, )
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS
CIVIL ACTION NO. 9:13cv283
ORDER OVERRULING OBJECTIONS AND ADOPTING
THE MAGISTRATE JUDGE’S REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION
Plaintiff Ivory Mitchell, formerly an inmate confined within the Texas Department of
Criminal Justice, Correctional Institutions Division, proceeding pro se, filed the above-styled civil
rights action against Kelvin Scott and Officer Mulligan. The court previously referred this matter
to the Honorable Keith F. Giblin, United States Magistrate Judge, for consideration pursuant to 28
U.S.C. § 636 and applicable orders of this court.
The Magistrate Judge has submitted a Report and Recommendation of United States
Magistrate Judge concerning this matter. The Magistrate Judge recommends the case be dismissed
for failure to state a claim upon which relief may be granted.
The court has received and considered the Report and Recommendation of United States
Magistrate Judge, along with the record and pleadings. Plaintiff filed objections to the Report
The court has conducted a de novo review of the objections in light of the record and the
applicable law. After careful consideration, the court is of the opinion the objections are without
merit. The Magistrate Judge correctly concluded that under the Hudson/Parratt doctrine, the
defendants did not violate plaintiff’s constitutional rights.
Accordingly, plaintiff’s objections are OVERRULED. The findings of fact and
conclusions of law of the Magistrate Judge are correct and the report of the Magistrate Judge is
ADOPTED as the opinion of the court. A final judgment shall be entered in accordance with the
recommendation of the Magistrate Judge.
SIGNED this the 4 day of August, 2014.
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?