Parker v. Salinas

S.D. Texas

Parker v. Salinas

DecidedAugust 30, 2022

Docket2:20-cv-00293

StatusUnknown

This text of Parker v. Salinas (Parker v. Salinas) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court, S.D. Texas primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Parker v. Salinas, (S.D. Tex. 2022).

Pincite

Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT August 30, 2022 SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS Nathan Ochsner, Clerk CORPUS CHRISTI DIVISION ROBERT LOUIS PARKER, JR., § § Plaintiff, § § v. § Civil Action No. 2:20-CV-00293 § J. GAUNA, SERGEANT SALINAS, § OFFICER EARWOOD, and § JANE DOE, § § Defendants. § MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER ACCEPTING MEMORANDUM AND RECOMMENDATION Robert Louis Parker, a Texas inmate currently housed at the Willacy Unit, appearing pro se and in forma pauperis, brings various claims arising out of his previous housing assignment at the Garza West Unit. Pending before the Court is the February 12, 2021 Memorandum and Recommendation (“M&R”) signed by Magistrate Judge Jason B. Libby. (Dkt. No. 14). Magistrate Judge Libby recommends that the Court screen most of Parker’s claims. Parker was provided notice and the opportunity to object. See 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). No objections were filed, so review is for plain error. Guillory v. PPG Indus., Inc., 434 F.3d 303, 308 (5th Cir. 2005). No plain error appears. The Court ACCEPTS the M&R as the Court’s Memorandum Opinion and Order. Accordingly, the Court: 1. RETAINS Parker’s deliberate indifference claims against Sargent Salinas and Officer Earwood, in their individual capacities, based on exposure to excessive heat; 2. RETAINS Parker’s deliberate indifference claim against Jane Doe Medical Provider or Assistant, in her individual capacity, based on inadequate treatment for Parker’s hand injury; 3. DISSMISSES WITHOUT PREJUDICE Parker’s claims for damages against Warden Gauna, in his official capacity, as barred by the Eleventh Amendment; 4, DISSMISSES WITH PREJUDICE Parker’s claims for injunctive relief; 5. DISMISSES WITH PREJUDICE Parker's claims against Warden Gauna as frivolous and/or for failure to state a claim; and 6. DISMISSES WITH PREJUDICE Parker’s remaining claims for failure to state a claim and/or as frivolous. It is SO ORDERED. Signed on August 30, 2022.

DREW B. TIPTON UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

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

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT August 30, 2022 SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS Nathan Ochsner, Clerk CORPUS CHRISTI DIVISION ROBERT LOUIS PARKER, JR., § § Plaintiff, § § v. § Civil Action No. 2:20-CV-00293 § J. GAUNA, SERGEANT SALINAS, § OFFICER EARWOOD, and § JANE DOE, § § Defendants. § MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER ACCEPTING MEMORANDUM AND RECOMMENDATION Robert Louis Parker, a Texas inmate currently housed at the Willacy Unit, appearing pro se and in forma pauperis, brings various claims arising out of his previous housing assignment at the Garza West Unit. Pending before the Court is the February 12, 2021 Memorandum and Recommendation (“M&R”) signed by Magistrate Judge Jason B. Libby. (Dkt. No. 14). Magistrate Judge Libby recommends that the Court screen most of Parker’s claims. Parker was provided notice and the opportunity to object. See 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). No objections were filed, so review is for plain error. Guillory v. PPG Indus., Inc., 434 F.3d 303, 308 (5th Cir. 2005). No plain error appears. The Court ACCEPTS the M&R as the Court’s Memorandum Opinion and Order. Accordingly, the Court: 1. RETAINS Parker’s deliberate indifference claims against Sargent Salinas and Officer Earwood, in their individual capacities, based on exposure to excessive heat; 2. RETAINS Parker’s deliberate indifference claim against Jane Doe Medical Provider or Assistant, in her individual capacity, based on inadequate treatment for Parker’s hand injury; 3. DISSMISSES WITHOUT PREJUDICE Parker’s claims for damages against Warden Gauna, in his official capacity, as barred by the Eleventh Amendment; 4, DISSMISSES WITH PREJUDICE Parker’s claims for injunctive relief; 5. DISMISSES WITH PREJUDICE Parker's claims against Warden Gauna as frivolous and/or for failure to state a claim; and 6. DISMISSES WITH PREJUDICE Parker’s remaining claims for failure to state a claim and/or as frivolous. It is SO ORDERED. Signed on August 30, 2022.

DREW B. TIPTON UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

Parker v. Salinas, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/parker-v-salinas-txsd-2022.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack