From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Burns v. Brewer

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN SOUTHERN DIVISION
Sep 11, 2019
2:18-cv-10937 (E.D. Mich. Sep. 11, 2019)

Opinion

2:18-cv-10937

09-11-2019

WILLIAM BURNS, Plaintiff, v. SHAWN BREWER, et al., Defendants.


ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION B

William Burns, a pro se plaintiff presently in the custody of the Michigan Department of Corrections ("MDOC"), claims that Defendants, employees of the MDOC, prohibited him from receiving proofs of books he has authored, in violation of his civil rights. This case is now before the Court on a motion for summary judgment filed by Defendants Michelle Floyd, Jennifer Norder, James King, Christine McCumber-Hemry, Kimberly Napier, Shawn Brewer, and Greg Wilton (ECF No. 26), and the corresponding report and recommendation issued by Magistrate Judge Elizabeth A. Stafford (ECF No. 45). For reasons described below, the report and recommendation will be accepted and adopted, Defendants' motion granted in part and denied in part, and claims against Defendants Fredeane Artis and Brent Rohrig dismissed sua sponte.

The Court has reviewed the Magistrate Judge's report and recommendation as well as the parties' briefing on the MDOC Defendants' motion for summary judgment. The law provides that either party may serve and file written objections "[w]ithin fourteen days after being served with a copy" of the report and recommendation. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). As of this date, neither party has filed any objections to the report and recommendation. The district court will make a "de novo determination of those portions of the report . . . to which objection is made." Id. Where, as here, neither party objects to the report, the district court is not obligated to independently review the record. See Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140, 149-52 (1985). The Court will therefore accept the Magistrate Judge's report and recommendation of August 15, 2019 as this Court's findings of fact and conclusions of law.

For these reasons, it is hereby ORDERED that Magistrate Judge Stafford's report and recommendation (ECF No. 45) is ACCEPTED and ADOPTED. The motion for summary judgment filed by Defendants Michelle Floyd, Jennifer Norder, James King, Christine McCumber-Hemry, Kimberly Napier, Shawn Brewer, and Greg Wilton (ECF No. 26) is therefore GRANTED IN PART and DENIED IN PART. The claims against Defendants Floyd, Norder, McCumber-Hemry, Brewer, and Wilton, are DISMISSED without prejudice. As recommended by Magistrate Judge Stafford, the Court will also sua sponte dismiss Plaintiff's claims against Fredeane Artis and Brent Rohrig.

Plaintiff's claims against Defendants Napier and King remain to be tried.

SO ORDERED. Dated: September 11, 2019

s/Terrence G. Berg

TERRENCE G. BERG

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Certificate of Service

I hereby certify that this Order was electronically filed, and the parties and/or counsel of record were served on September 11, 2019.

s/B. Sauve

Case Manager


Summaries of

Burns v. Brewer

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN SOUTHERN DIVISION
Sep 11, 2019
2:18-cv-10937 (E.D. Mich. Sep. 11, 2019)
Case details for

Burns v. Brewer

Case Details

Full title:WILLIAM BURNS, Plaintiff, v. SHAWN BREWER, et al., Defendants.

Court:UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN SOUTHERN DIVISION

Date published: Sep 11, 2019

Citations

2:18-cv-10937 (E.D. Mich. Sep. 11, 2019)

Citing Cases

Proctor v. M. Fountain

This is reinforced by Proctor's reliance on Burns v. Brewer-a First Amendment Turner factors case-for his…