Fields v. Ward, No. 5:2022cv00128 - Document 28 (N.D. Tex. 2023)

Court Description: ORDER ACCEPTING FINDINGS, CONCLUSIONS, AND RECOMMENDATION OF THE UNTIED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE re: 26 Findings and Recommendations on 1 Complaint filed by Quintine Fields. The Court orders Plaintiff's claims against the Lamesa Police Department are dismissed with prejudice under 28 U.S.C. §§ 1915(e)(2)(B) and 1915A(b). Plaintiff's claims for illegal search and seizure, false report, defamation, and denial of medical care are dismissed with prejudice under 28 U.S. C. §§ 1915(e)(2)(B) and 1915A(b). There is no just reason for delay in entering a final judgment and final judgment should be entered as to the above-named Defendants and claims under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 54(b). The Court will enter judgment accordingly. The caption of this case will be changed to reflect that Officer Ward is the only remaining defendant. If Plaintiff wishes to proceed with his excessive-force claim against Defendant Officer Ward, he must provide the Court with an address for service within 30 days of the date of this order. (Ordered by Judge James Wesley Hendrix on 10/25/2023) (bdg)

Download PDF
Fields v. Ward Doc. 28 Case 5:22-cv-00128-H Document 28 Filed 10/25/23 Page 1 of 2 PageID 92 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS LUBBOCK DIVISION QUINTINE FIELDS, Plaintiff, No. v 5:22-CV-00128-H LAMESA POLICE DEPARTMENT et al, , Defendants ORDER ACCEPTING FINDINGS, CONCLUSIONS, AND RECOMMENDATION OF THE UMTED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE The United States Magisffate Judge made findings, conclusions, and a recommendation that the Court should dismiss with prejudice all of Plaintiffs claims except his excessive-use-of-force claim against Defendant Officer Ward. The Magistrate Judge recommended that the Court should require Defendant Officer Ward to answer or otherwise respond to Plaintiffs excessive-force claim. No objections were filed. The District Court independently examined the record and reviewed the findings, conclusions, and recommendation for plain error. Finding none, the Court accepts and adopts the findings, conclusions, and recommendation of the United States Magistrate Judge. However, the Court cannot direct service on Officer Ward because Plaintiffhas not provided the Court with an address where Officer Ward may be served.r I Plaintiffprovides the address for the Lamesa Policc Dcpartmcnt in his Amendcd Complaint. Dkt. No. 7. But Plaintiffasserts that Officer Ward no longer works for the Lamesa Policc Department, s<r the Court cannot servc Officer Ward there. Dkt. No. l. Plaintiffstates that Offrccr Ward "has staned working again in Midland" but he gives no other information about where Offrcer Ward may be found. Id, Dockets.Justia.com Case 5:22-cv-00128-H Document 28 Filed 10/25/23 Page 2 of 2 PageID 93 As a result, the Court orders: l. Plaintiffs claims against the Lamesa Police Department are dismissed with prejudice under 28 U.S.C. $0 1915(e)(2XB) and 1915A(b). 2. Plaintiffs claims for illegal search and seizure, false report, defamation, and denial of medical care are dismissed with prejudice under 28 U.S.C. $$ 1915(e)(2XB) and lersA(b). 3. There is no just reason for delay in entering a final judgment and final judgment should be entered as to the above-named Defendants and claims under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 54O). The Court will enter judgment accordingly. 4. The caption of this case will be changed to reflect that Officer Ward is the only remaining defendant. 5. If Plaintiffwishes to proceed with his excessive-force claim against Defendant Officer Ward, he must provide the Court with an address for service within 30 days of the date of this order, If Plaintifffails to timely provide the required location information, the Court will dismiss Plaintiffs claims against this defendant. So ordered. Dated October L\ ^n- , 2023, J U WESLEY HENDRIX d States District Judge S

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.