Savage v. Lamartinierre

Full title: JEFFERY SAVAGE (#196217) v. JOSEPH LAMARTINIERRE, ET AL.

Court: UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT MIDDLE DISTRICT OF LOUISIANA

Date published: Jan 24, 2020

CIVIL ACTION NO.:18-00831-BAJ-RLB (M.D. La. Jan. 24, 2020)

Opinion

CIVIL ACTION NO.:18-00831-BAJ-RLB

01-24-2020

JEFFERY SAVAGE (#196217) v. JOSEPH LAMARTINIERRE, ET AL.

JUDGE BRIAN A. JACKSON UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT MIDDLE DISTRICT OF LOUISIANA

RULING AND ORDER

Before the Court is the United States Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendation (Doc. 53) pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §636(b)(1). The Report and Recommendation addresses the Motions to Dismiss filed by Defendants (Docs. 41 & 45). The Magistrate Judge recommended that Defendants' Motions be denied in part as moot with regards to Plaintiff's claims for conspiracy and retaliation, as the Court had previously concluded that Plaintiff's Complaint, as amended, stated a claim for retaliation and conspiracy. Additionally, the Magistrate Judge recommended that the Motions be denied in all other regards due to the sufficiency of Plaintiff's Complaint, as amended. The Magistrate Judge further recommended that this matter be referred to him for further proceedings.

The Report and Recommendation notified the parties that, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §636(b)(1), they had fourteen days from the date they received the Report and Recommendation to file written objections to the proposed findings of fact, conclusions of law, and recommendations therein. No objections or responses were filed by either party.

Having carefully considered the underlying Complaint, the instant motion, and related filings, the Court approves the Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendation, and hereby adopts its findings of fact, conclusions of law, and recommendation.

Accordingly,

IT IS ORDERED that the Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendation (Doc. 53) is ADOPTED as the Court's opinion herein.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Defendants' Motions to Dismiss (Docs. 41 & 45) are DENIED IN PART AS MOOT with regards to Plaintiff's claims for conspiracy and retaliation.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that in all other regards the Motions to Dismiss (Docs. 41 & 45) are DENIED.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that this matter be referred to the Magistrate Judge for further proceedings.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Plaintiff's Motion to Dismiss Defendant's Motion as Moot (Doc. 50), which is appropriately considered to be an opposition to the instant motions, be terminated as a motion by the Clerk of Court.

Baton Rouge, Louisiana, this 24^th day of January, 2020.

/s/ _________

JUDGE BRIAN A. JACKSON

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

MIDDLE DISTRICT OF LOUISIANA