Butler v. Pickell

Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN NORTHERN DIVISION

ANTHONY MICHAEL BUTLER,

Plaintiff, Case No. 1:21-cv-10817

v. Honorable Thomas L. Ludington United States District Judge ROBERT PICKELL et al., Honorable Kimberly G. Altman Defendants. United States Magistrate Judge ________________________________________/ ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION, GRANTING DEFENDANTS’ MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT, AND DISMISSING CASE WITH PREJUDICE

In March 2021, Plaintiff Anthony Michael Butler filed a pro se complaint1 under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 alleging that Defendants violated his constitutional rights by installing security cameras that allegedly recorded his confidential attorney-client meetings. ECF No. 1. In July 2022, Plaintiff’s claims under the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments, the Michigan Constitution, state law, and for injunctive relief were dismissed. ECF No. 33. In February 2023, Defendants filed a motion for summary judgment on Plaintiff’s remaining Fourth and Sixth Amendment claims arguing that Plaintiff “had no expectation of privacy” and that the recorded conversations “were not private,” so attorney-client privilege does not apply. ECF No. 35 at PageID.210. On May 18, 2023, Magistrate Judge Kimberly G. Altman issued a report recommending that Defendants’ Motion be granted because Plaintiff had no reasonable expectation of privacy and Defendants’ conduct was based on “a valid penological interest that was not outweighed by any chilling effect.” ECF No. 39 at PageID.354–66. Judge Altman provided 14 days to object, but the parties did not do so. They have therefore forfeited their right to appeal Judge Altman’s findings.

1 Co-plaintiff Dylan Earick was dismissed without prejudice in August 2021. ECF No. 8. See Berkshire v. Dahl, 928 F.3d 520, 530–31 (6th Cir. 2019) (citing Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140, 149 (1985)). There is no clear error in the report. Accordingly, it is ORDERED that Magistrate Judge Altman’s Report and Recommendation, ECF No. 39, is ADOPTED. Further, it is ORDERED that Defendants’ Motion for Summary Judgment, ECF No. 35,

is GRANTED. Further, it is ORDERED that the above-captioned case is DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE. This is a final order and closes the above-captioned case.

Dated: June 8, 2023 s/Thomas L. Ludington THOMAS L. LUDINGTON United States District Judge