Smith v. Western Regional Jail et al, No. 3:2012cv07358 - Document 135 (S.D.W. Va. 2013)
Court Description: MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER: Accepting and incorporating Magistrate Judge Eifert's 116 PF&R; granting the 74 MOTION and the 90 AMENDED MOTION by West Virginia Regional Jail & Correctional Facility Authority, Western Regional Jail to Dism iss Plaintiff's 21 Amended Complaint; denying the 79 MOTION by William E. Smith in opposition to the 74 MOTION by West Virginia Regional Jail & Correctional Facility Authority for Summary Judgment; granting the 108 MOTION by William E . Smith to Release West Virginia Regional Jail Facility Authority and Division Western Regional Jail Facility as Individual Defendants; dismissing plaintiff's complaint and amended complaint, with prejudice, against the Western Regional Jail & C orrectional Facility Authority and the Western Regional Jail, the same to continue to pend against the remaining defendants; removing the West Virginia Regional Jail & Correctional Facility Authority and the Western Regional Jail as defendants from the style of this civil action. Signed by Judge Robert C. Chambers on 7/18/2013. (cc: attys; any unrepresented party) (skm) Modified docket text on 7/18/2013 to include all judicial action. (ras)
Download PDF
<![CDATA[
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF WEST VIRGINIA HUNTINGTON DIVISION WILLIAM E. SMITH, Plaintiff, v. CIVIL ACTION NO. 3:12-CV-7358 WEST VIRGINIA REGIONAL JAIL & CORRECTIONAL FACILITY AUTHORITY; WESTERN REGIONAL JAIL; CORRECTIONAL OFFICER BERLIN; CORRECTIONAL OFFICER MARCUM; CORRECTIONAL OFFICER BLANKENSHIP; CORRECTIONAL OFFICER GOODWIN; CORRECTIONAL OFFICER VANMETER; AND CORRECTIONAL OFFICER LAMBERT, Defendants. MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER This action was referred to the Honorable Cheryl A. Eifert, United States Magistrate Judge, for submission to this Court of proposed findings of fact and recommendation for disposition, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. ' 636(b)(1)(B). The Magistrate Judge has submitted findings of fact and recommended that the Motion to Dismiss on Behalf of Defendants, West Virginia Regional Jail & Correctional Facility Authority and the Western Regional Jail, (ECF No. 74), and the Amended Motion to Dismiss on Behalf of the Defendants, (ECF No. 90), be GRANTED; Plaintiff s Motion in Opposition to the Defendants Motion, (ECF No. 79), be DENIED; Plaintiff s Motion to Release the West Virginia Regional Jail & Correctional Facility Authority and the Western Regional Jail, (ECF No. 108), be GRANTED; Plaintiff s complaint and amended complaint be DISMISSED, with prejudice, against the West Virginia Regional Jail & Correctional Facility Authority and the Western Regional Jail, but continue to pend against the remaining defendants; and the West Virginia Regional Jail & Correctional Facility Authority and the Western Regional Jail be removed as defendants from the style of this civil action. Neither party has filed objections to the Magistrate Judge=s findings and recommendations. Accordingly, the Court accepts and incorporates herein the findings and recommendation of the Magistrate Judge and, consistent with the findings and recommendations, ORDERS that: 1. The Motion to Dismiss on Behalf of Defendants, West Virginia Regional Jail & Correctional Facility Authority and the Western Regional Jail, (ECF No. 74), and the Amended Motion to Dismiss on Behalf of the Defendants, (ECF No. 90), be GRANTED; 2. Plaintiff s Motion in Opposition to the Defendants Motion, (ECF No. 79), be DENIED; 3. Plaintiff s Motion to Release the West Virginia Regional Jail & Correctional Facility Authority and the Western Regional Jail, (ECF No. 108), be GRANTED; 4. Plaintiff s complaint and amended complaint be DISMISSED, with prejudice, against the West Virginia Regional Jail & Correctional Facility Authority and the Western Regional Jail, but continue to pend against the remaining defendants; and 5. The West Virginia Regional Jail & Correctional Facility Authority and the Western Regional Jail be removed as defendants from the style of this civil action. The Court DIRECTS the Clerk to forward copies of this written opinion and order to all counsel of record, and any unrepresented parties. ENTER: -2- July 18, 2013
]]>
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.
