Coleman v. Sellars

Filing 27

AMENDED ORDER ACCEPTING 20 FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATION OF THE UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE: Defendant Todd Sellar's Motion to Dismiss Under FED. R. CIV. P. 12(b)(2)(5) [sic] and (6), filed on May 16, 2013 (doc. 8 ) is GRANTED in part. By separate judgment, the plaintiff's federal claims will be DISMISSED with prejudice for failure to state a claim. (Ordered by Judge Barbara M.G. Lynn on 4/10/2014) (axm)

Download PDF
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS DALLAS DIVISION AUDREY COLEMAN Plaintiff, vs. TODD SELLARS, Dallas County U.S. Assistant District Attorney, Defendant. ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) No. 3:13-CV-1648-M Referred to U.S. Magistrate Judge AMENDED ORDER ACCEPTING FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATION OF THE UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE After reviewing the objections to the Findings, Conclusions, and Recommendation of the United States Magistrate Judge and conducting a de novo review of those parts of the Findings and Conclusions to which objections have been made, I am of the opinion that the Findings and Conclusions of the Magistrate Judge are correct and they are accepted as the Findings and Conclusions of the Court. Defendant Todd Sellar’s Motion to Dismiss Under FED. R. CIV. P. 12(b)(2)(5) [sic] and (6), filed on May 16, 2013 (doc. 8) is GRANTED in part. By separate judgment, the plaintiff’s federal claims will be DISMISSED with prejudice for failure to state a claim. The Court declines to exercise supplemental jurisdiction over the plaintiff’s state law claims, and those claims will be dismissed with prejudice. The Court further notes that it is not granting Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss Under Rule 12(b)(5) for improper service, and that Plaintiff does not have the right to object to the Court receiving recommendations from the Magistrate Judge. SIGNED this 10th day of April, 2014. _________________________________ BARBARA M. G. LYNN UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS

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?