From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Miceli v. McDonough

United States District Court, N.D. Florida, Tallahassee Division
Mar 19, 2008
Case No. 4:07cv480-SPM/WCS (N.D. Fla. Mar. 19, 2008)

Opinion

Case No. 4:07cv480-SPM/WCS.

March 19, 2008


ORDER


This cause comes on for consideration upon the magistrate judge's Report and Recommendation (doc. 7) and the Second Report and Recommendation (doc. 9). Plaintiff has been afforded an opportunity to file objections pursuant to Title 28, United States Code, Section 636(b)(1). Plaintiff filed objections on January 14, 2008 (doc. 18). Pursuant to Title 28, United States Code, Section 636(b)(1), I have made a de novo determination of those portions to which an objection has been made.

Plaintiff's objections consist mostly of disagreement with the magistrate's conclusion that the transfer of Plaintiff to another facility is a violation of Plaintiff's rights. Vague allegations that Plaintiff is in "constant cognizable known danger" is insufficient to allege a constitutional violation and a causal connection between this alleged danger and the named Defendants. Even in his objection, Plaintiff fails to offer any legal basis for the establishment of a constitutional right. Relocating Plaintiff to another facility simply does not rise to the level necessary to sustain a finding that any of Plaintiff's constitutional rights were violated.

This Court finds that Plaintiff's vague allegations in his first motion are not sufficient to demonstrate a need for emergency treatment that he has been unable to receive from the physician's assistant at his current facility. Furthermore, in Plaintiff's second motion, he failed to demonstrate a current or potential violation of any constitutional rights.

Accordingly, it is ORDERED AND ADJUDGED as follows:

1. The magistrate judge's Report and Recommendation (doc. 7) is adopted and incorporated by reference in this order.
2. Plaintiff's emergency motion for a restraining order (doc. 6) is hereby denied.
3. The magistrate judge's Second Report and Recommendation (doc. 9) is adopted and incorporated by reference in this order.
4. Plaintiff's second emergency motion for a restraining order (doc. 8) is also denied.
5. This case is remanded to the magistrate judge for further proceedings.
DONE AND ORDERED.


Summaries of

Miceli v. McDonough

United States District Court, N.D. Florida, Tallahassee Division
Mar 19, 2008
Case No. 4:07cv480-SPM/WCS (N.D. Fla. Mar. 19, 2008)
Case details for

Miceli v. McDonough

Case Details

Full title:CHARLES N. MICELI, Plaintiff, v. JAMES R. McDONOUGH, et al., Defendants

Court:United States District Court, N.D. Florida, Tallahassee Division

Date published: Mar 19, 2008

Citations

Case No. 4:07cv480-SPM/WCS (N.D. Fla. Mar. 19, 2008)

Citing Cases

Lohstreter v. English

See Miceli v. McDonough, No. 4:07cv480, 2008 WL 783578, at *3 (N.D. Fla. Mar. 19, 2008) (holding that…

Harris v. Forrester-Troupe

The third requirement, balancing potential harm to the parties, weighs more heavily in favor of Defendants as…