Leggett v. Gallatin Police Department, No. 3:2021cv00924 - Document 24 (M.D. Tenn. 2022)

Court Description: MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER: Nevertheless, the Court has reviewed the R&R de novo and agrees with its recommended disposition. Accordingly, Leggett's objections are OVERRULED, the Magistrate Judge's R&R (Doc. No. 17 ) is APPROVED AND AD OPTED, and this case is DISMISSED. This is a final order and the Clerk shall enter judgment in accordance with Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 58. Signed by Chief Judge Waverly D. Crenshaw, Jr on 5/23/2022. (xc:Pro se party by regular mail.) (DOCKET TEXT SUMMARY ONLY-ATTORNEYS MUST OPEN THE PDF AND READ THE ORDER.)(ln)

Download PDF
Leggett v. Gallatin Police Department Doc. 24 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT MIDDLE DISTRICT OF TENNESSEE NASHVILLE DIVISION WILLIAM RAY LEGGETT, Plaintiff, v. GALLATIN POLICE DEPARTMENT, Defendant. ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) No. 3:21-cv-00924 MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER Before the Court is the Magistrate Judge’s Report and Recommendation (“R&R”) (Doc. No. 17) recommending that Defendant Gallatin Police Department’s Motion to Dismiss (Doc. No. 12) be granted and that this case be dismissed. William Ray Leggett has filed two objections. (Doc. Nos. 19, 20). In the first, Leggett says: “I am stating a motion against thy [sic] Gallatin Police Department not to dismiss thy [sic] case I have against them.” (Doc. No. 19 at 1). Leggett’s second objection shares his religious beliefs and opinions. (Doc. No. 20 at 1–2). The “filing of vague, general, or conclusory objections does not meet the requirement of specific objections and is tantamount to a complete failure to object,” Cole v. Yukins, 7 F. App’x 354, 356 (6th Cir. 2001), Leggett has not offered a proper objection to the R&R. Nevertheless, the Court has reviewed the R&R de novo and agrees with its recommended disposition. Accordingly, Leggett’s objections are OVERRULED, the Magistrate Judge’s R&R (Doc. No. 17) is APPROVED AND ADOPTED, and this case is DISMISSED. This is a final order and the Clerk shall enter judgment in accordance with Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 58. Dockets.Justia.com IT IS SO ORDERED. __________________________________________ WAVERLY D. CRENSHAW, JR. CHIEF 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.