Coots v. Twilla <i>et al. </i>
This text of Coots v. Twilla <i>et al. </i> (Coots v. Twilla <i>et al. </i>) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court, S.D. Ohio primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO WESTERN DIVISION - CINCINNATI JAMES R. COOTS, : Case No. 1:22-ev-625 Plaintiff, Judge Matthew W. McFarland □ : OFFICER TWILLA, et al., Defendants.
ENTRY AND ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION (Doc. 7) Court has reviewed the Report and Recommendation of United States Magistrate Judge Kimberly A. Jolson (Doc. 7), to whom this case is referred pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b). Noting that no objections have been filed and the time for filing such objections under Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b) has expired, the Court ADOPTS said Report and Recommendation in its entirety. Accordingly, the Complaint (Doc. 6) is DISMISSED with prejudice pursuant to 28 US.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B) and § 1915A(b), with exception of Plaintiff's Eighth Amendment excessive force claims against Defendants Twilla, Straight, Emmons, Link, and Nance. The Court CERTIFIES, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3), that, for the reasons outlined in the Report and Recommendation (Doc. 7), an appeal of this Order would not be taken in good faith. Plaintiff is therefore DENIED leave to appeal in forma pauperis. See McGore v. Wrigglesworth, 114 F.3d 601 (6th Cir. 1997).
IT IS SO ORDERED. UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO Wes) “Wi He fiLf ¢ ae By: JUDGE MATTHEW W. McFARLAND
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
Coots v. Twilla <i>et al. </i>, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/coots-v-twilla-iet-al-i-ohsd-2023.