(PC) Flowers v. Johnson et al, No. 1:2015cv01778 - Document 48 (E.D. Cal. 2018)

Court Description: ORDER ADOPTING 46 FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS ; ORDER GRANTING IN PART Defendants' 31 Motion for Summary Judgment, signed by District Judge Anthony W. Ishii on 1/29/2018. (Martin-Gill, S)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 RUPERT FLOWERS, 12 13 14 15 Plaintiff, v. B. JOHNSON, et al., CASE NO. 1:15-cv-01778- AWI-MJS (PC) ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS TO GRANT IN PART DEFENDANTS’ MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT (ECF Nos. 31, 46) Defendants. 16 17 Plaintiff is a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis in this civil 18 rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. The matter was referred to a United States 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 Magistrate Judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 302. On December 11, 2017, the magistrate judge filed findings and recommendations herein which were served on the parties and which contained notice that any objections to the findings and recommendations were to be filed within fourteen days. Neither party has filed objections to the findings and recommendations. The Court has reviewed the file and finds the findings and recommendations to be supported by the record and by the magistrate judge’s analysis. Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that: 27 28 1 1 2 3 4 5 1. The findings and recommendations filed December 11, 2017 (ECF No. 46), are adopted in full; 2. Defendants’ motion for summary judgment (ECF No. 31) is GRANTED IN PART as follows: a. Summary judgment is GRANTED for Lt. Marsh on Plaintiff’s failure to 6 intervene claim insofar as it relates to Lt. Marsh’s conduct predating the 7 assault; and 8 9 10 b. Summary judgment is DENIED for Lt. Marsh on Plaintiff’s failure to intervene claim insofar as it relates to the alleged assault outside of the Program Office. 11 12 IT IS SO ORDERED. 13 Dated: January 29, 2018 SENIOR DISTRICT JUDGE 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 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.