James Hightower v. Denise Burkett, et al.

E.D. Kentucky

James Hightower v. Denise Burkett, et al.

District Court, E.D. Kentucky·Decided December 5, 2025·No. 5:25-cv-00114·Unknown

Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF KENTUCKY CENTRAL DIVISION (at Lexington)

JAMES HIGHTOWER, ) ) Plaintiff, ) Civil Action No. 5: 25-114-DCR ) v. ) ) DENISE BURKETT, et al., ) ORDER ) Defendants. )

*** *** *** ***

This matter is pending for consideration of the Report and Recommendation (“R&R”) filed by United States Magistrate Judge Matthew A. Stinnett on November 7, 2025. [Record No. 50] Neither the plaintiff nor any defendant have filed timely objections to the R&R. Therefore, the Court considers any potential objections to be waived as the parties were advised previously. See United States v. Walters, 638 F.2d 947, 950 (6th Cir. 1981); Thomas v. Arn, 106 S.Ct. 466, 468 (1985). Accordingly, it is hereby ORDERED as follows: 1. The R&R [Record No. 50] is ADOPTED in full and INCORPORATED here by reference. 2. Plaintiff Hightower’s Motion to Amend Complaint [Record No. 41] is GRANTED regarding the claims asserted against Defendants Christian and Elders in their official and individual capacities but DENIED regarding the claims asserted against Defendants Tracy, Caudill, Napier, Hughes, Slemp, and “Debor”. Plaintiff Hightower’s Motion to Amend Complaint is DENIED to the extent it seeks to revive previously dismissed individual capacity claims against Defendants Burkett, Patterson and Golff. 3. Defendants Patterson’s and Golff's Motion to Dismiss [Record No. 46] is DENIED, without prejudice, as moot. 4. Plaintiff Hightower’s Motion for Extension of Time [Record No. 54] is GRANTED to the extent he seeks to file a Second Amended Complaint consistent with this Court’s earlier Memorandum Opinion and Order [Record No. 7] and the R&R of United States Magistrate Judge Stinnett [Record No. 50] but DENIED to the extent he seeks to file a Second Amended Complaint that is inconsistent with the referenced opinions of the undersigned or the United States Magistrate Judge. 5. Plaintiff Hightower will be given until Wednesday, December 31, 2025, to file a Second Amended Complaint in the record of this proceeding that is consistent with this Order. Dated: December 5, 2025.

4 a Danny C. Reeves, District Judge 1 SS sr xy United States District Court hla Eastern District of Kentucky

-2-

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

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF KENTUCKY CENTRAL DIVISION (at Lexington)

JAMES HIGHTOWER, ) ) Plaintiff, ) Civil Action No. 5: 25-114-DCR ) v. ) ) DENISE BURKETT, et al., ) ORDER ) Defendants. )

*** *** *** ***

This matter is pending for consideration of the Report and Recommendation (“R&R”) filed by United States Magistrate Judge Matthew A. Stinnett on November 7, 2025. [Record No. 50] Neither the plaintiff nor any defendant have filed timely objections to the R&R. Therefore, the Court considers any potential objections to be waived as the parties were advised previously. See United States v. Walters, 638 F.2d 947, 950 (6th Cir. 1981); Thomas v. Arn, 106 S.Ct. 466, 468 (1985). Accordingly, it is hereby ORDERED as follows: 1. The R&R [Record No. 50] is ADOPTED in full and INCORPORATED here by reference. 2. Plaintiff Hightower’s Motion to Amend Complaint [Record No. 41] is GRANTED regarding the claims asserted against Defendants Christian and Elders in their official and individual capacities but DENIED regarding the claims asserted against Defendants Tracy, Caudill, Napier, Hughes, Slemp, and “Debor”. Plaintiff Hightower’s Motion to Amend Complaint is DENIED to the extent it seeks to revive previously dismissed individual capacity claims against Defendants Burkett, Patterson and Golff. 3. Defendants Patterson’s and Golff's Motion to Dismiss [Record No. 46] is DENIED, without prejudice, as moot. 4. Plaintiff Hightower’s Motion for Extension of Time [Record No. 54] is GRANTED to the extent he seeks to file a Second Amended Complaint consistent with this Court’s earlier Memorandum Opinion and Order [Record No. 7] and the R&R of United States Magistrate Judge Stinnett [Record No. 50] but DENIED to the extent he seeks to file a Second Amended Complaint that is inconsistent with the referenced opinions of the undersigned or the United States Magistrate Judge. 5. Plaintiff Hightower will be given until Wednesday, December 31, 2025, to file a Second Amended Complaint in the record of this proceeding that is consistent with this Order. Dated: December 5, 2025.

4 a Danny C. Reeves, District Judge 1 SS sr xy United States District Court hla Eastern District of Kentucky

-2-

James Hightower v. Denise Burkett, et al., (E.D. Ky. 2025).

Pincite

James Hightower v. Denise Burkett, et al. (James Hightower v. Denise Burkett, et al.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related