Carnell v. Brown et al, No. 9:2017cv00022 - Document 9 (D. Mont. 2017)
Court Description: ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS. This dismissal counts as a strike pursuant to 28 U.S.C. Section 1915(g) and any appeal of this decision would not be taken in good faith. Signed by Judge Dana L. Christensen on 9/27/2017. (APP) Copy mailed to Plaintiff
Download PDF
<![CDATA[
Carnell v. Brown et al Doc. 9 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF MONTANA MISSOULA DIVISION CV 17-22-M-DLC-JCL DOUGLAS JAMES CARNELL, Plaintiff, ORDER vs. BRANDY HOUSER, et al., Defendants. United States Magistrate Judge Jeremiah C. Lynch entered his Findings and Recommendations in this case on August 28, 2017, recommending that this action be dismissed for failure to state a claim. Plaintiff Douglas James Camell ("Camell") failed to timely object to the findings and recommendations, and so waived the right to de novo review of the record. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(l). The Court will therefore review the record for clear error. McDonnell Douglas Corp. v. Commodore Bus. Mach., Inc., 656 F.2d 1309, 1313 (9th Cir. 1981). After reviewing the record and finding no clear error, IT IS ORDERED that Judge Lynch's Findings and Recommendations (Doc. 8) is ADOPTED IN FULL. (1) This matter is DISMISSED. -1- Dockets.Justia.com (2) The Clerk of Court is directed to close this matter and enter judgment pursuant to Rule 58 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. (3) The Clerk of Court is directed to have the docket reflect that this dismissal counts as a strike pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g) based upon Camell' s failure to state a claim. (4) The Clerk of Court is directed to have the docket reflect that the Court certifies pursuant to Rule 24(a)(3)(A) of the Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure that any appeal of this decision would not be taken in good faith. The record makes plain the instant Complaint lacks arguable substance in law or fact. DATED this 2.1-~ay of September, Dana L. Christensen, Chief Judge United States District Court -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.
