Webb v. Weber County Government et al

Filing 114

ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS ; denying 46 Motion for Partial Summary Judgment; denying 48 Motion for Partial Summary Judgment; denying 65 Motion for Summary Judgment. Plaintiff is ORDERED to include any future s ummary judgment claims within a single summary judgment motion; Plaintiff is ORDERED to refrain from filing a future summary judgment motion until after the court rules on Plaintiffs pending discovery motions (Dkt. Nos. 41, 52, 55, 74, 78, 89, 93, 95). Signed by Judge Dee Benson on 3/10/14. (jlw)

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF UTAH
NORTHERN DIVISION

DAVID WEBB,
Plaintiff,

ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND
RECOMMENDATION

vs.

TIMOTHY SCOTT, et al,

Case No. 1:11-CV-128
Judge Dee Benson

Defendants.

Before the court is the Report and Recommendation issued by United States Magistrate
Judge Dustin D. Pead on February 21, 2014, recommending that:(1) Plaintiff’s summary
judgment motions be denied without prejudice (Dkt. Nos. 46, 48, 65); (2) the court order Plaintiff
to include any future summary judgment claims within a single summary judgment motion; and
(3) the court order Plaintiff to refrain from filing a future summary judgment motion until after
the court rules on Plaintiff’s pending discovery motions (Dkt. Nos. 41, 52, 55, 74, 78, 89, 93,
95).
The parties were notified of their right to file objections to the Report and
Recommendation within fourteen (14) days after receiving it. On February 27, 2014, Plaintiff
filed his “Objection to Report and Recommendations.” (Dkt. No. 109.)
Having reviewed all relevant materials, including Plaintiff’s Objection to Report and

Recommendations, and the reasoning set forth in the Magistrate Judge’s Report and
Recommendation, the court ADOPTS the Report and Recommendation. Accordingly, the court
hereby ORDERS as follows:
1.

Plaintiff’s summary judgment motions are DENIED without prejudice (Dkt. Nos.
46, 48, 65);

2.

Plaintiff is ORDERED to include any future summary judgment claims within a
single summary judgment motion;

3.

Plaintiff is ORDERED to refrain from filing a future summary judgment motion
until after the court rules on Plaintiff’s pending discovery motions (Dkt. Nos. 41,
52, 55, 74, 78, 89, 93, 95);

DATED this 10th day of March, 2014.

_________________________________
Dee Benson
United States District Judge