From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Smith v. Patterson

United States District Court, E.D. Michigan, Southern Division
Feb 12, 2010
Case Nos. 07-14034, 08-11019, 08-11022, 08-13280 (E.D. Mich. Feb. 12, 2010)

Opinion

Case Nos. 07-14034, 08-11019, 08-11022, 08-13280.

February 12, 2010


ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANTS' MOTION FOR CLARIFICATION


Before the court is Defendants' motion for clarification of this court's February 1, 2010 order granting in part and denying in party Defendants' motion for summary judgment. Defendants note that the order did not specifically address the claims against Michael Lividini, Kenneth May, and John MacDonald. Plaintiffs claimed that these defendants had a duty to intervene to prevent Steven Schwein from violating Plaintiff Devin Plummer's constitutional rights. See Pls.' Resp. at 17-18 (docket # 53). The court ruled that Plummer could not sustain his constitutional claims. By implication, therefore, the claims against Lividini, May, and MacDonald also must fail. There is no allegation that Lividini, May, or MacDonald had personal involvement in the remaining claims by Plaintiffs Clifford Collins III and Brandon Pannell.

Therefore, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Defendants' motion for clarification is GRANTED.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Plaintiffs' claims against Defendants Lividini, May, and MacDonald are DISMISSED.


Summaries of

Smith v. Patterson

United States District Court, E.D. Michigan, Southern Division
Feb 12, 2010
Case Nos. 07-14034, 08-11019, 08-11022, 08-13280 (E.D. Mich. Feb. 12, 2010)
Case details for

Smith v. Patterson

Case Details

Full title:FRANKLIN SMITH, DEVIN PLUMMER, BRANDON PANNELL, and CLIFFORD COLLINS, JR.…

Court:United States District Court, E.D. Michigan, Southern Division

Date published: Feb 12, 2010

Citations

Case Nos. 07-14034, 08-11019, 08-11022, 08-13280 (E.D. Mich. Feb. 12, 2010)