Opinion
Civil Case No. 04-cv-02505-LTB-PAC.
January 24, 2006
ORDER
This action is before the Court upon Recommendations of the Magistrate Judge filed November 23, 2005. The Recommendations were issued on pending dispositive motions while Plaintiff was proceeding pro se. Following issuance of the recommendations, counsel entered his appearance on behalf of Plaintiff. After granting extensions of time to Plaintiff and his counsel to file objections to the recommendations, Plaintiff, through counsel, has now filed timely written objections to the Magistrate Judge's recommendations. I have therefor reviewed the recommendations de novo in light of the file and record in this case.
Specifically, the Magistrate Judge recommends as follows:
1. That Defendant Kaser's Motion for Summary Judgment (Doc 57 — filed October 20, 2005) be granted and that the claim for battery alleged against him be dismissed;
2. That the City Defendants' Motion for Summary Judgment (Doc 58 — filed October 21, 2005) be granted and that all claims asserted against the City and the officers be dismissed;
3. That Plaintiff's Motion for Summary Judgment (Doc 65 — filed November 15, 2005) be denied; and
4. That judgment enter in favor of all Defendants and against Plaintiff and that Defendants be awarded all of their costs but including in particular that they be awarded the attorney fees and costs to which they are entitled by statute as described in the body of the recommendation as follows:
a. For Officers Bedenbender and Michael, for the attorney fees and costs that they incurred in defending against Plaintiff's claim for defamation; and
b. For Defendant Kaser for all of the attorney fees and costs that he incurred for defending against Plaintiff's single cause of action against him for battery.
Upon de novo review of the file and record in this action, in light of the Plaintiff's objections to the recommendations, I conclude that the recommendations are correct in their entirety. Accordingly
IT IS ORDERED as follows:
1. Defendant Kaser's Motion for Summary Judgment (Doc 57 — filed October 20, 2005) is GRANTED and the claim for battery alleged against him is DISMISSED;
2. The City Defendants' Motion for Summary Judgment (Doc 58 — filed October 21, 2005) is GRANTED and all claims asserted against the City and the officers are DISMISSED;
3. Plaintiff's Motion for Summary Judgment (Doc 65 — filed November 15, 2005) is DENIED; and
4. Judgment shall enter in favor of all Defendants and against Plaintiff and Defendants are awarded all of their costs but including in particular they are awarded the attorney fees and costs to which they are entitled by statute as follows:
a. For Officers Bedenbender and Michael, for the attorney fees and costs that they incurred in defending against Plaintiff's claim for defamation; and
b. For Defendant Kaser for all of the attorney fees and costs that he incurred for defending against Plaintiff's single cause of action against him for battery.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Officers Bedenbender and Michael and Defendant Kaser shall submit their bill of costs and statement of attorney fees supported by specific billings records to the Court within 20 days from the date of entry of this order and Plaintiff shall have 10 days from the date of such submissions to respond.