Williams v. Garland Police Department et al
Filing
10
Order Accepting 8 Findings and Recommendations of the United States Magistrate Judge. Plaintiff's request for appointment of counsel, incorporated within his objections, is DENIED. (Ordered by Judge Barbara M.G. Lynn on 10/3/2013) (aaa)
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS
DALLAS DIVISION
CHUCK WILLIAMS,
Plaintiff,
V.
GARLAND POLICE DEPARTMENT,
ET AL.,
Defendants.
§
§
§
§
§
§
§
§
§
§
No. 3:13-cv-2880-M
ORDER
The United States Magistrate Judge made Findings, Conclusions, and
Recommendations in this case. Plaintiff filed objections on September 20, 2013, and the
District Court has made a de novo review of those portions of the proposed Findings,
Conclusions, and Recommendation to which objection was made. The objections are
overruled, and the Court ACCEPTS the Findings, Conclusions and Recommendations
of the United States Magistrate Judge. Plaintiff’s request for appointment of counsel,
incorporated within his objections, is DENIED.
The Court CERTIFIES that any appeal of this action would not be taken in good
faith. See 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3). In support of this finding, the Court adopts and
incorporates by reference the Magistrate Judge’s Findings, Conclusions, and
Recommendation. See Baugh v. Taylor, 117 F.3d 197, 202 n.21 (5th Cir. 1997). Based
on the Findings, Conclusions, and Recommendation, the Court finds that any appeal
of this action would present no legal point of arguable merit and would, therefore, be
frivolous. Howard v. King, 707 F.2d 215, 220 (5th Cir. 1983).
SO ORDERED this 3rd day of October, 2013.
_________________________________
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?