Funzie v. Little et al, No. 1:2009cv00001 - Document 57 (M.D. Tenn. 2010)
Court Description: ORDER: The Court hereby rules as follows: (1) The 55 Report and Recommendation is hereby ACCEPTED and APPROVED; (2) The 47 Motion for Summary Judgment filed by the remaining Defendants Carl Odle, Paul Flanders, Wayne Brandon, Scotty Smith, Richar d Dixon and Regina McDonald is hereby GRANTED; and (3) Plaintiff's claims are hereby DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE. Entry of this Order on the docket shall constitute entry of a final judgment in accordance with Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 58 and 79(a). Signed by Senior Judge Robert Echols on 03/18/2010. (xc: Pltf by reg. and cert. mail)(ab)
Download PDF
<![CDATA[
Funzie v. Little et al Doc. 57 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT MIDDLE DISTRICT OF TENNESSEE COLUMBIA DIVISION RUDELL FUNZIE, Plaintiff, v. GEORGE M. LITTLE, et al. Defendants. ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) Case No. 1:09-0001 Judge Echols ORDER This is an action under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 and the Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act, 42 U.S.C. § 2000cc, in which Plaintiff alleges that various Tennessee Corrections Department employees confiscated some of his religious materials when he was assigned to the Wayne County Boot Camp. On June 23, 2009, this Court entered an Order (Docket Entry No. 43) which accepted and approved the Magistrate Judge’s Report and Recommendation granting the Motion to Dismiss (Docket Entry No. 33) filed by Defendants George M. Little, Bruce Westbrook, Darrell Murphy, and Tom Mathis, leaving only the claims against Defendants Carl Odle, Paul Flanders, Wayne Brandon, Scotty Smith, Richard Dixon and Regina McDonald. Thereafter, those remaining Defendants filed an unopposed Motion for Summary Judgment (Docket Entry No. 47) and the Magistrate Judge has entered a Report and Recommendation (“R & R”) (Docket Entry No. 55) which recommends that the Motion be granted and that Plaintiff’s claims be dismissed. The R & R was issued on January 12, 2010, and Plaintiff has filed no objections thereto, even though he was informed in the R & R of his right to file objections. Where no objections are made to the R & R, “[t]he district judge may accept, reject, or modify the recommended disposition; receive further evidence; or return the matter to the magistrate judge with instructions.” Fed.R.Civ.P. 72(b). The Court has thoroughly reviewed the record in this case and the applicable law and concludes that the Magistrate Judge was correct in recommending 1 Dockets.Justia.com that the unopposed Motion for Summary Judgment filed on behalf of the remaining Defendants (Docket Entry No. 47) be granted. Accordingly, the Court hereby rules as follows: (1) The Report and Recommendation (Docket Entry No. 55) is hereby ACCEPTED and APPROVED; (2) The Motion for Summary Judgment (Docket Entry No. 47) filed by the remaining Defendants Carl Odle, Paul Flanders, Wayne Brandon, Scotty Smith, Richard Dixon and Regina McDonald is hereby GRANTED; and (3) Plaintiff’s claims are hereby DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE. Entry of this Order on the docket shall constitute entry of a final judgment in accordance with Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 58 and 79(a). It is SO ORDERED. ____________________________________ ROBERT L. ECHOLS UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 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.
