From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Adams v. Franklin

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS TYLER DIVISION
Jan 25, 2017
CIVIL ACTION NO. 6:16cv238 (E.D. Tex. Jan. 25, 2017)

Opinion

CIVIL ACTION NO. 6:16cv238

01-25-2017

CLARENCE DOUGLAS ADAMS v. MARY FRANKLIN, ET AL.


MEMORANDUM ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION OF THE UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE AND ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR INJUNCTIVE RELIEF

The Plaintiff Clarence Adams, proceeding pro se, filed this civil rights lawsuit under 42 U.S.C. §1983 complaining of alleged deprivations of his constitutional rights. This Court ordered that the matter be referred to the United States Magistrate Judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §636(b)(1) and (3) and the Amended Order for the Adoption of Local Rules for the Assignment of Duties to United States Magistrate Judges.

Adams has filed a motion for a temporary restraining order or preliminary injunction asking that the prison officials be enjoined from threatening him, writing him disciplinary cases for helping other inmates, and denying him legal supplies. He also asked that he not be moved from the trusty camp into the building and that officers stop searching his legal property and losing his court papers.

After review of the motion, the Magistrate Judge issued a Report recommending that Adams' motion for injunctive relief be denied. Adams received a copy of this Report but filed no objections thereto; accordingly, he is barred from de novo review by the District Judge of those findings, conclusions, and recommendations and, except upon grounds of plain error, from appellate review of the unobjected-to proposed factual findings and legal conclusions accepted and adopted by the district court. Douglass v. United Services Automobile Association, 79 F.3d 1415, 1430 (5th Cir. 1996) (en banc).

The Court has reviewed the pleadings in this cause and the Report of the Magistrate Judge. Upon such review, the Court has determined the Report of the Magistrate Judge is correct. See United States v. Wilson, 864 F.2d 1219, 1221 (5th Cir.), cert. denied, 492 U.S. 918, 109 S.Ct. 3243 (1989) (where no objections to a Magistrate Judge's Report are filed, the standard of review is "clearly erroneous, abuse of discretion and contrary to law.") It is accordingly

ORDERED that the Report of the Magistrate Judge (docket no. 10) is ADOPTED as the opinion of the District Court. It is further

ORDERED that the Plaintiff's motion for a temporary restraining order and preliminary injunction (docket no. 7) is DENIED.

So Ordered and Signed

Jan 25, 2017

/s/_________

Ron Clark, United States District Judge


Summaries of

Adams v. Franklin

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS TYLER DIVISION
Jan 25, 2017
CIVIL ACTION NO. 6:16cv238 (E.D. Tex. Jan. 25, 2017)
Case details for

Adams v. Franklin

Case Details

Full title:CLARENCE DOUGLAS ADAMS v. MARY FRANKLIN, ET AL.

Court:UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS TYLER DIVISION

Date published: Jan 25, 2017

Citations

CIVIL ACTION NO. 6:16cv238 (E.D. Tex. Jan. 25, 2017)