Smith v. Caldwell et al, No. 2:2020cv00810 - Document 41 (N.D. Ala. 2022)

Court Description: MEMORANDUM OPINION - The parties' failure to file specific objections waives any challenge to the proposed findings and recommendations. See 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1); 11th Cir. 3-1. The court therefore ADOPTS the magistrate judge's repor t and ACCEPTS the recommendations. The court DENIES Mr. Smith's motion for an evidentiary hearing. The court GRANTS IN PART and DENIES IN PART Defendants' motion for summary judgment. The court WILL ENTER SUMMARY JUDGMENT in Mr. Caldwell� 39;s favor and against Mr. Smith. The court WILL ENTER SUMMARY JUDGMENT in favor of Mr. Jenkins, Mr. Matthews, and Mr. Mechalske and against Mr. Smith on all official capacity claims asserted against them and with respect to Mr. Smiths request for t ermination of their employment. The court WILL ENTER SUMMARY JUDGMENT in Mr. Matthews' favor and against Mr. Smith as to Mr. Smith's claim of sexual assault. The court WILL ENTER SUMMARY JUDGMENT in favor of Mr. Jenkins and against Mr. Smit h on the claim of retaliation with respect to Mr. Smith's cell reassignment and the assaults by inmates Jack Jones and Edward Knight. The court REFERS this case to the magistrate judge for further proceedings on the remaining claims identified above. Signed by Judge Annemarie Carney Axon on 3/7/2022. (KEK)

Download PDF

Smith v. Caldwell et al Doc. 41 FILED 2022 Mar-07 PM 12:02 U.S. DISTRICT COURT N.D. OF ALABAMA UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ALABAMA SOUTHERN DIVISION SERON SMITH, Plaintiff, v. CAPT. CALDWELL, et al., Defendants. ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) Case No. 2:20-cv-810-ACA-GMB MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER On February 9, 2022, the magistrate judge entered a report recommending that the court (1) deny Plaintiff Seron Smith’s motion for evidentiary hearing; (2) grant Defendant Shannon Caldwell’s motion for summary judgment as to all of Mr. Smith’s claims against him; (3) grant Defendants Mohammed Jenkins, Trenton Matthews, and Shaun Mechalske’s motion for summary judgment as to all of Mr. Smith’s claims against them in their official capacities, as well as Mr. Smith’s request for their termination of employment; (4) deny Mr. Jenkins’ motion for summary judgment as to Mr. Smith’s claims against him for excessive force on January 2 and 16, 2020; (5) deny Mr. Matthews and Mr. Mechalske’s motion for summary judgment as to Mr. Smith’s claims against them for excessive force on May 26, 2020; (6) grant Mr. Matthews’ motion for summary judgment as to Mr. Smith’s claim against him for sexual assault; and (7) deny Mr. Jenkins’ motion Dockets.Justia.com for summary judgment on Mr. Smith’s claims for retaliation against him as to the January 2 and 16, 2020 incidents but grant the motion as to Mr. Smith’s remaining allegations. (Doc. 40). The magistrate judge notified the parties of their right to object and warned them that failure to object waives the right to challenge on appeal any unobjected-to factual and legal conclusions. (Doc. 40 at 31–32). The deadline for objections has passed without receipt of any objections. The parties’ failure to file specific objections waives any challenge to the proposed findings and recommendations. See 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1); 11th Cir. 3-1. The court therefore ADOPTS the magistrate judge’s report and ACCEPTS the recommendations. The court DENIES Mr. Smith’s motion for an evidentiary hearing. The court GRANTS IN PART and DENIES IN PART Defendants’ motion for summary judgment. The court WILL ENTER SUMMARY JUDGMENT in Mr. Caldwell’s favor and against Mr. Smith. The court WILL ENTER SUMMARY JUDGMENT in favor of Mr. Jenkins, Mr. Matthews, and Mr. Mechalske and against Mr. Smith on all official capacity claims asserted against them and with respect to Mr. Smith’s request for termination of their employment. The court WILL ENTER SUMMARY JUDGMENT in Mr. Matthews’ favor and against Mr. Smith as to Mr. Smith’s claim of sexual assault. The court WILL ENTER SUMMARY JUDGMENT in favor of Mr. Jenkins and against Mr. Smith 2 on the claim of retaliation with respect to Mr. Smith’s cell reassignment and the assaults by inmates Jack Jones and Edward Knight. The court REFERS this case to the magistrate judge for further proceedings on the remaining claims identified above. The court will enter a separate partial judgment consistent with this opinion and order. DONE and ORDERED this March 7, 2022. _________________________________ ANNEMARIE CARNEY AXON UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 3

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.