(PC) Nelson et al v. Butte County Sheriff's Dept., et al, No. 2:2009cv02776 - Document 92 (E.D. Cal. 2012)

Court Description: ORDER signed by Judge John A. Mendez on 11/15/12 ORDERING that the FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS filed 9/14/12 90 are ADOPTED in full; Plaintiff Canfield's Eighth Amendment crutches claim is DISMISSED for failure to state a claim. (Mena-Sanchez, L)

Download PDF
(PC) Nelson et al v. Butte County Sheriff's Dept., et al Doc. 92 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 DONALD NELSON, et al., 11 Plaintiffs, 12 13 No. 2:09-cv-2776 JAM EFB P vs. BUTTE COUNTY SHERIFF’S DEPARTMENT, et al., 14 Defendants. ORDER 15 / 16 17 Plaintiffs Donald Nelson, Thomas Brewer, Joseph Simpson, and Donald Canfield, 18 current and/or former inmates of Butte County Jail, proceed through counsel in an action brought 19 under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. The matter was referred to a United States Magistrate Judge pursuant to 20 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 302. 21 On September 14, 2012, the magistrate judge filed findings and recommendations 22 herein which were served on all parties and which contained notice to all parties that any 23 objections to the findings and recommendations were to be filed within fourteen days from the 24 date the findings and recommendations were served. Plaintiffs have filed objections to the 25 findings and recommendations. 26 //// 1 Dockets.Justia.com 1 In accordance with the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C) and Local Rule 2 304, this court has conducted a de novo review of this case. Having carefully reviewed the entire 3 file, the court finds the findings and recommendations to be supported by the record and by 4 proper analysis. 5 Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that: 6 1. The findings and recommendations filed September 14, 2012 are adopted in 7 full; 8 9 10 11 2. Plaintiff Canfield’s Eighth Amendment crutches claim is dismissed for failure to state a claim. So ordered. DATED: November 15, 2012 12 /s/ John A. Mendez 13 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT JUDGE 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.