Murray v. Fleharty

• Court: District Court, E.D. Texas
• Decided: October 20, 2020
• Docket: 6:20-cv-00174
• Status: Unknown

Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS No. 6:20-cv-00174 Aloysius Murray, Plaintiff, V. Sheriff Fleharty, et al., Defendants.

ORDER On April 1, 2020, plaintiff Aloysius Murray filed this civil rights action. Doc. 1. This case was referred to United States Magistrate Judge John D. Love pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636. Doc. 3. After conducting proceedings in the form and manner prescribed by 28 U.S.C. §§ 636(b)(1) and (3), Judge Love is- sued a report and recommendation that the complaint be dis- missed without prejudice for failure to state a claim upon which relief may be granted. Doc. 17. The report acknowl- edged that despite being given an opportunity to amend his complaint, the plaintiff failed to include specific facts concern- ing the personal involvement of either Sheriff Fleharty or An- derson County. Id. The plaintiff filed a document styled as a “response to court[,]” but his filing did not mention the report or address either of the named defendants in this lawsuit. See Doc. 18. When a party objects to a magistrate judge’s report, but it is unclear which, if any, portions of the court are objected to, the court will review the record only for clear error. See Nettles v. Wainwright, 656 F.2d 986, 987 (5th Cir. 1981) (“It is reasona- ble to place upon the parties the duty to pinpoint those por- tions of the magistrate’s report that the court must specially consider.”)

Finding no clear error in the report, the court accepts the magistrate judge’s findings and recommendation. This action is dismissed without prejudice. Any pending motions are denied as moot. So ordered by the court on October 20, 2020.

J7CAMPBELL BARKER United States District Judge

-2-