Carlton v. Turner

Full title: ADRIAN CARLTON, Plaintiff, v. P. TURNER, et al., Defendants

Court: United States District Court, W.D. Michigan, Northern Division

Date published: Dec 11, 2006

Case No. 2:04-cv-1 (W.D. Mich. Dec. 11, 2006)

Opinion

Case No. 2:04-cv-1.

December 11, 2006

ORDER

R. EDGAR, District Judge

On October 18, 2006, plaintiff Adrian Carlton filed a motion for summary judgment under Fed.R.Civ.P. 56. [Doc. No. 267]. At this juncture, the remaining defendants are P. Turner, R. Ekdahl, and W. Jondreau.

The motion was referred to United States Magistrate Judge Timothy P. Greeley for a report and recommendation pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and W.D. Mich. LCivR 72.1. On November 14, 2006, the Magistrate Judge submitted his report and recommendation. [Doc. No. 276]. It is recommended that the motion be denied for two reasons. The motion is not timely filed and there are genuine issues of material fact in dispute which preclude summary judgment under Fed.R.Civ.P. 56.

Plaintiff objects to the report and recommendation. [Doc. No. 279]. After reviewing the record de novo, the Court concludes that the plaintiff's objection is without merit and it is DENIED. The Court ACCEPTS and ADOPTS the report and recommendation pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1), Fed.R.Civ.P. 72(b), and W.D. Mich. LCivR 72.3(b). Accordingly, the plaintiff's motion for summary judgment [Doc. No. 267] is DENIED.

SO ORDERED.