Summary
granting summary judgment for defendants on plaintiff's substantive due process claims arising from his imprisonment beyond his maximum sentence "because [p]laintiff has, or easily could have, brought the same claim under the Eighth Amendment[; thus, his] Fourteenth Amendment substantive due process claims are not cognizable under the 'explicit source rule'"
Summary of this case from Williams v. Pa. Dep't of Corr.Opinion
Civil Action No. 07-272 Erie.
February 5, 2010
MEMORANDUM JUDGMENT ORDER
Plaintiff's civil rights complaint was received by the Clerk of Court on October 9, 2007 and was referred to United States Magistrate Judge Susan Paradise Baxter for report and recommendation in accordance with the Magistrates Act, 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1), and Rules 72.1.3 and 72.1.4 of the Local Rules for Magistrates.
The Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendation [56], filed on November 12, 2009, recommends that the Defendants' Motion for Summary Judgment [41] be granted. The parties were allowed ten (10) days from the date of service in which to file objections. Plaintiff filed his objections [58] on December 16, 2009. Afterde novo review of the complaint and documents in the case, together with the Report and Recommendation and Plaintiff's objections thereto, the following order is entered:
AND NOW, this 5th day of February, 2010;
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the Defendants' Motion for Summary Judgment [41] be, and hereby is, GRANTED. JUDGMENT is hereby entered in favor of the Defendants and against Plaintiff Donald Granberry.
The Report and Recommendation of Magistrate Judge Baxter, dated November 12, 2009 [56], is adopted as the opinion of this Court.