From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Wiethorn v. Valdez

United States District Court, N.D. Texas, Dallas Division
Jun 29, 2007
Civil Action No. 3:07-CV-896-L (N.D. Tex. Jun. 29, 2007)

Summary

holding that constipation, without more, amounted to only de minimis injury

Summary of this case from Roy v. Cobb

Opinion

Civil Action No. 3:07-CV-896-L.

June 29, 2007


ORDER


This is a pro se civil rights action brought under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b), and an order of the court in implementation thereof, this action was referred to the United States magistrate judge for proposed findings and recommendation. On June 14, 2007, the Findings and Recommendation of the United States Magistrate Judge ("Report") were filed, in which the magistrate judge recommends dismissal of the action pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2). Plaintiff Carl Wiethorn ("Wiethorn") filed Objection to the Recommendation ("Objection") on June 27, 2007.

After making an independent review of the pleadings, file and record in this case, and the magistrate judge's Report, the court determines that the findings of the magistrate judge are correct in recommending dismissal of the action for failure to state a claim for which relief may be granted. Wiethorn's Objection does not state a basis for his objection, instead, Weithorn states simply that he "formally object[s]" to the recommendation made by the magistrate judge. As Weithorn has stated no basis, his Objection is overruled. The findings of the magistrate judge are accepted as those of the court. Accordingly, this case is hereby dismissed with prejudice for failure to state a claim for which relief may be granted.

It is so ordered.


Summaries of

Wiethorn v. Valdez

United States District Court, N.D. Texas, Dallas Division
Jun 29, 2007
Civil Action No. 3:07-CV-896-L (N.D. Tex. Jun. 29, 2007)

holding that constipation, without more, amounted to only de minimis injury

Summary of this case from Roy v. Cobb

finding on failure to provide medical care claim that five weeks with treatment for constipation resulting in abdominal pains, difficulty sleeping, pulled stomach muscle, and ongoing pain for approximately one month was de minimis

Summary of this case from Harold v. Tangipahoa Par. Sheriff Office
Case details for

Wiethorn v. Valdez

Case Details

Full title:CARL WIETHORN, Plaintiff, v. SHERIFF LUPE VALDEZ, Defendant

Court:United States District Court, N.D. Texas, Dallas Division

Date published: Jun 29, 2007

Citations

Civil Action No. 3:07-CV-896-L (N.D. Tex. Jun. 29, 2007)

Citing Cases

Roy v. Cobb

See Blackwell v. Madison Par. Corr. Ctr., 2010 WL 147987, at *9 (W.D. La. Jan. 13, 2010) (recommending…

Palomo v. Collier

See Harold v. Tangipahoa Par. Sheriff Off., No. CV 20-2220, 2021 WL 2920513, at *14 (E.D. La. June 18,…