Amanda Lindsey v. Unknown Tillman et al.

E.D. Texas

Amanda Lindsey v. Unknown Tillman et al.

DecidedFebruary 23, 2026

Docket6:25-cv-00010

StatusUnknown

This text of Amanda Lindsey v. Unknown Tillman et al. (Amanda Lindsey v. Unknown Tillman et al.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court, E.D. Texas primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Amanda Lindsey v. Unknown Tillman et al., (E.D. Tex. 2026).

Pincite

Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS No. 6:25-cv-00010 Amanda Lindsey, Plaintiff, V. Unknown Tillman et al., Defendants.

ORDER Plaintiff, a Gregg County Jail inmate proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis, brought this action under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 against defendants Gregg County Jail, Jailer Tillman, and Jailer Mungai. Doc. 1. The case was referred to a magistrate judge. Doc. 3. Defendants Mungai and Tillman each moved for summary judgment, based on plaintiff’s failure to exhaust administrative remedies and defendant’s qualified immunity, respectively. Docs. 18, 19. The magistrate judge issued a report recommending that the court dismiss claims against defendant Gregg County Jail for being a non-jural entity, deny defendant Mungai’s motion (Doc. 18), and grant defendant Tillman’s motion (Doc. 19). Doc. 23 at 13, 24. Additionally, because granting defendant Tillman’s motion “also inures to the benefit” of defendant Mungai, the report rec- ommended that the court dismiss the case with prejudice. Doc. 23 at 22, 24 (quoting Lewis ». Lynn, 236 F.3d 766, 768 (5th Cir. 2001)). No party filed written objections. When there have been no timely objections to a report, or the objections are improper, “the court need only satisfy itself that there is no clear error on the face of the record.” Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b), advisory committee’s notes to 1983 amendment. Having re- viewed the record and being satisfied that there is no clear error, the court accepts the report’s findings and recommendations. Claims against Gregg County Jail are dismissed because Gregg County Jail is a non-jural entity unamenable to suit. Defendant

-l-

Mungai’s motion for summary judgment (Doc. 18) is denied. De- fendant Tillman’s motion for summary judgment (Doc. 19) is granted. The granting of defendant Tillman’s motion is inured to the benefit of defendant Mungai. See Lewis, 236 F.3d at 768 (“it would be incongruous and unfair to allow some defendants to pre- vail, while not providing the same benefit to similarly situated de- fendants.” (cleaned up)). Accordingly, plaintiff’s lawsuit is dis- missed with prejudice. Any pending motions are denied as moot. So ordered by the court on February 23, 2026.

J: CAMPBELL BARKER United States District Judge

-2-

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS No. 6:25-cv-00010 Amanda Lindsey, Plaintiff, V. Unknown Tillman et al., Defendants.

ORDER Plaintiff, a Gregg County Jail inmate proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis, brought this action under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 against defendants Gregg County Jail, Jailer Tillman, and Jailer Mungai. Doc. 1. The case was referred to a magistrate judge. Doc. 3. Defendants Mungai and Tillman each moved for summary judgment, based on plaintiff’s failure to exhaust administrative remedies and defendant’s qualified immunity, respectively. Docs. 18, 19. The magistrate judge issued a report recommending that the court dismiss claims against defendant Gregg County Jail for being a non-jural entity, deny defendant Mungai’s motion (Doc. 18), and grant defendant Tillman’s motion (Doc. 19). Doc. 23 at 13, 24. Additionally, because granting defendant Tillman’s motion “also inures to the benefit” of defendant Mungai, the report rec- ommended that the court dismiss the case with prejudice. Doc. 23 at 22, 24 (quoting Lewis ». Lynn, 236 F.3d 766, 768 (5th Cir. 2001)). No party filed written objections. When there have been no timely objections to a report, or the objections are improper, “the court need only satisfy itself that there is no clear error on the face of the record.” Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b), advisory committee’s notes to 1983 amendment. Having re- viewed the record and being satisfied that there is no clear error, the court accepts the report’s findings and recommendations. Claims against Gregg County Jail are dismissed because Gregg County Jail is a non-jural entity unamenable to suit. Defendant

-l-

Mungai’s motion for summary judgment (Doc. 18) is denied. De- fendant Tillman’s motion for summary judgment (Doc. 19) is granted. The granting of defendant Tillman’s motion is inured to the benefit of defendant Mungai. See Lewis, 236 F.3d at 768 (“it would be incongruous and unfair to allow some defendants to pre- vail, while not providing the same benefit to similarly situated de- fendants.” (cleaned up)). Accordingly, plaintiff’s lawsuit is dis- missed with prejudice. Any pending motions are denied as moot. So ordered by the court on February 23, 2026.

J: CAMPBELL BARKER United States District Judge

-2-

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

Amanda Lindsey v. Unknown Tillman et al., Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/amanda-lindsey-v-unknown-tillman-et-al-txed-2026.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack