(PC) Morris v. Hickinson, et al, No. 2:2006cv02936 - Document 109 (E.D. Cal. 2010)
Court Description: ORDER signed by Senior Judge Lawrence K. Karlton on 8/31/2010 ORDERING that The 105 findings and recommendations filed July 30, 2010, are adopted in full. The 93 motion for summary judgment filed by defendants Fry and Herrera is GRANTED. Plaint iff's 75 motion for summary judgment is DENIED. Plaintiff's claim for emotional or mental distress damages is DISMISSED. This action shall proceed solely on plaintiff's retaliation and Eighth Amendment claims against defendant Hickison. This case is referred back to the magistrate judge for further orders.(Duong, D)
Download PDF
<![CDATA[
(PC) Morris v. Hickinson, et al Doc. 109 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 ROBERT MORRIS, 11 12 13 14 Plaintiff, vs. D. HICKINSON, et al., Defendants. 15 16 No. 2:06-cv-2936 LKK KJN P ORDER / Plaintiff, a state prisoner proceeding pro se, has filed this civil rights action 17 seeking relief under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. The matter was referred to a United States Magistrate 18 Judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 302. 19 On July 30, 2010, the magistrate judge filed findings and recommendations herein 20 which were served on all parties and which contained notice to all parties that any objections to 21 the findings and recommendations were to be filed within twenty-one days. Plaintiff has filed 22 objections to the findings and recommendations. Defendants have filed a reply. 23 In accordance with the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C) and Local Rule 24 304, this court has conducted a de novo review of this case. Having carefully reviewed the entire 25 file, the court finds the findings and recommendations to be supported by the record and by 26 proper analysis. 1 Dockets.Justia.com 1 Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that: 2 1. The findings and recommendations filed July 30, 2010, are adopted in full; 3 2. The motion for summary judgment filed by defendants Fry and Herrera is 4 granted. (Dkt. No. 93.) 5 3. Plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment is denied. (Dkt. No. 75.) 6 4. Plaintiff’s claim for emotional or mental distress damages is dismissed. 7 5. This action shall proceed solely on plaintiff’s retaliation and Eighth 8 9 10 Amendment claims against defendant Hickison. 6. This case is referred back to the magistrate judge for further orders. DATED: August 31, 2010. 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 2
]]>
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You
should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google
Privacy Policy and
Terms of Service apply.
