Tawe v. Corbett et al
Filing
26
ORDER ADOPTING MEMORANDUM AND RECOMMENDATIONS re: 13 Memorandum and Recommendations. The Court OVERRULES Plaintiff's objection; GRANTS 7 Corbett's Motion to Dismiss; GRANTS 8 Putnam, McKee, and Alsobrook's motion to dismiss; DE NIES Plaintiff's 11 motion to amend, DENIES AS MOOT Plaintiff's 20 motion for sanctions; DENIES AS MOOT Plaintiff's 21 motion for default judgment; and DISMISSES WITHOUT PREJUDICE Plaintiff's action. (Signed by Judge Hilda G Tagle) Parties notified.(scavazos, 1)
United States District Court
Southern District of Texas
ENTERED
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS
CORPUS CHRISTI DIVISION
RICHARD N TAWE,
Plaintiff,
VS.
SUSANNA CORBETT, et al,
Defendants.
§
§
§
§
§
§
§
§
March 01, 2018
David J. Bradley, Clerk
CIVIL NO. 2:17-CV-00028
ORDER
The Court is in receipt of Defendant Susanna Corbett’s (“Corbett”) February
28, 2017, motion to dismiss, Dkt. No. 7; Defendants Kenneth Putnam, Jr.
(“Putnam”), James A. McKee (“McKee”), and Michael E. Alsobrook’s (“Alsobrook”)
March 9, 2017, motion to dismiss, Dkt. No. 8; Plaintiff’s April 13, 2017, motion to
amend, Dkt. No. 11; the June 8, 2017, Memorandum and Recommendation (“M&R”)
of the Magistrate Judge to whom this case was referred, Dkt. No. 13; Plaintiff’s
June 26, 2017, objection to the M&R, Dkt. No. 17; Plaintiff’s December 13, 2017,
motion for sanctions, Dkt. No. 20; and Plaintiff’s December 13, 2017, motion for
default judgment, Dkt. No. 21.
The Court reviews objected-to portions of a Magistrate Judge’s proposed
findings and recommendations de novo. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). Plaintiff’s objections
to the M&R are frivolous, conclusory, general, or contain no arguments that the
M&R has not already considered. Dkt. No. 17; see also Battle v. United States Parole
Comm’n, 834 F.2d 419 (5th Cir. 1987) (determining that a district court need not
consider frivolous, conclusive, or general objections). After independently reviewing
the record and considering the applicable law, the Court adopts the proposed M&R
in its entirety. Dkt. No. 13. Thus, the Court OVERRULES Plaintiff’s objection.
The Court hereby:
GRANTS Corbett’s motion to dismiss, Dkt. No. 7;
GRANTS Putnam, McKee, and Alsobrook’s motion to dismiss, Dkt. No. 8;
1/2
DENIES Plaintiff’s motion to amend, Dkt. No. 11;
DENIES AS MOOT Plaintiff’s motion for sanctions, Dkt. No. 20;
DENIES AS MOOT Plaintiff’s motion for default judgment, Dkt. No. 21; and
DISMISSES WITHOUT PREJUDICE Plaintiff’s action.
The Court will order entry of final judgment separately.
SIGNED this 1st day of March, 2018.
___________________________________
Hilda Tagle
Senior United States District Judge
2/2
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?