Opinion
Civil Action 1:21-cv-03252-CNS-SKC
10-17-2022
JASON AARON PRESCOTT, individually and next friend of J.R.P. and J.E.P., minors, Plaintiff, v. RICHARD VALDEZ, individually and in his official capacity as Sheriff of Archuleta County, Colorado; JAMES MARTINEZ, individually and in his official capacity as Deputy Sheriff of Archuleta County, Colorado; DEREK WOODMAN, individually and in his official capacity as Undersheriff of Archuleta County, Colorado; WARREN BROWN, individually and in his official capacity as Operations Commander in the Archuleta Sheriff's Office; ROXANNE LATTIN, individually and in her official capacity as Deputy Sheriff in the Archuleta County Sheriff's Office HAYLEIGH BROWN, individually and in her official capacity as Deputy Sheriff in the Archuleta County Sheriff's Office; PATRICK SMITH, individually and in his official capacity as a Detective in the Archuleta County Sheriff's Office; CODY CIVILETTO, individually and in his official capacity as a Deputy Sheriff in the Archuleta County Sheriff's Office; MICHAEL SINDELAR, individually and in his official capacity as a Deputy Sheriff in the Archuleta County Sheriff's Office; BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS ARCHULETA COUNTY COLORADO; JOHN DOES 1-5, whose actual names are unknown as yet to the Plaintiff; and JANE DOES 1-5, whose actual names are unknown as yet to Plaintiff, Defendants.
ORDER ADOPTING MAGISTRATE JUDGE RECOMMENDATION
CHARLOTTE N. SWEENEY UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
Before the Court is the Order and Recommendation by Magistrate Judge Crews issued on September 23, 2022 (ECF No. 19). For the following reasons, the Court AFFIRMS and ADOPTS the Order and Recommendation.
The parties were advised that they had fourteen days, after being served with a copy of the Order and Recommendation, to file written objections to obtain reconsideration by the District Judge assigned to the case. See Fed.R.Civ.P. 72(b). Neither party has filed an objection to Judge Crews' Order and Recommendation.
Under 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B), this Court may designate a magistrate judge to consider dispositive motions and submit recommendations to the Court. When a magistrate judge submits a recommendation, the Court must “determine de novo any part of the magistrate judge's [recommended] disposition that has been properly objected to.” Fed.R.Civ.P. 72(b)(3). A party's failure to file such written objections may bar the party from a de novo determination by the District Judge of the proposed findings and recommendations. Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140, 150 (1985). When this occurs, the Court is “accorded considerable discretion” and “may review a magistrate's report under any standard it deems appropriate.” Summers v. State of Utah, 927 F.2d 1165, 1167 (10th Cir. 1991) (citing Thomas, 474 U.S. at 150).
After reviewing all the relevant pleadings, the Court concludes that Judge Crews' analysis was thorough and comprehensive, the Order and Recommendation is well-reasoned, and the Court finds no clear error on the face of the record. Accordingly, the Court AFFIRMS and ADOPTS Judge Crews' Order and Recommendation (ECF No. 19) as an Order of this Court. The Partial Motion to Dismiss (ECF No. 7) is GRANTED. Plaintiff's claims against the Board of County Commissioners and Defendants Lattin, H. Brown, Smith and Civiletto are DISMISSED without prejudice. Plaintiff's fourth claim for extreme and outrageous conduct is DISMISSED without prejudice. The Court agrees with the Magistrate Judge's determination that amending the Complaint would not be futile (ECF No. 19 at 4). Plaintiff, should he choose to do so, shall file an amended complaint on or before November 1, 2022.