From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Hembrook v. Seiber

United States District Court, M.D. Tennessee, Northeastern Division
Sep 20, 2022
2:20-cv-00058 (M.D. Tenn. Sep. 20, 2022)

Opinion

2:20-cv-00058

09-20-2022

ROSE M. HEMBROOK, Plaintiff, v. DONALD SEIBER, Defendant.


ORDER

WAVERLY D. CRENSHAW, JR., CHIEF, DISTRICT JUDGE

The Court is receipt of a Report and Recommendations (Doc. No. 40) from the Magistrate Judge recommending that Donald Seiber's unopposed Motion for Summary Judgment (Doc. No. 29) in this Section 1983 action be granted. No objections have been filed to the Report and Recommendation and the time for doing so has passed. Having considered the matter de novo as required by Rule 72 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, the Court agrees with the Report and Recommendation and rules as follows:

(1) The Report and Recommendation (Doc. No. 40) is ACCEPTED and APPROVED;
(2) Defendant's Motion for Summary Judgment (Doc. No. 29) is GRANTED; and
(3) This case is DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE.

In accordance with Rule 58, the Clerk of the Court shall enter a final judgment and close this case.

IT IS SO ORDERED.


Summaries of

Hembrook v. Seiber

United States District Court, M.D. Tennessee, Northeastern Division
Sep 20, 2022
2:20-cv-00058 (M.D. Tenn. Sep. 20, 2022)
Case details for

Hembrook v. Seiber

Case Details

Full title:ROSE M. HEMBROOK, Plaintiff, v. DONALD SEIBER, Defendant.

Court:United States District Court, M.D. Tennessee, Northeastern Division

Date published: Sep 20, 2022

Citations

2:20-cv-00058 (M.D. Tenn. Sep. 20, 2022)

Citing Cases

United States v. Ewing

Defendant acknowledges as much but argues that it is impossible to distinguish whether a cannabis plant is…