Simmons, Jr. v. Whitaker et al, No. 1:2020cv00464 - Document 136 (E.D. Va. 2022)

Court Description: MEMORANDUM OPINION (See Memorandum Opinion for further details). Signed by District Judge T. S. Ellis, III on 01/25/2022. (lber c/s)

Download PDF
Simmons, Jr. v. Whitaker et al Doc. 136 Case 1:20-cv-00464-TSE-IDD Document 136 Filed 01/25/22 Page 1 of 15 PageID# 747 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF VIRGINIA Alexandria Division Johnnie R. Simmons,Jr., Plaintiff, I:20cv464(TSE/MSN) v. R. Whitaker, et al.. Defendants. MEMORANDUM OPINION Johnnie R. Simmons, Jr.("Plaintiff' or "Simmons"), a former' Virginia inmate proceeding pro filed a civil-rights suit under 42 U.S.C. ยง 1983, alleging his rights were violated while detained at the Hampton Roads Regional Jail("HRRJ")on February 8,2019 when he was choked into unconsciousness by defendants R. Whitaker^ and Derrick Brown.[Dkt. No. 1 at 4, 9]. Plaintiff also names Benjamin Hull, and Superintendent C. Waltz as defendants in relation to the February 8, 2019 incident. On July 13, 2021, Defendants Brown and Hull each filed a motion for summary judgment with supporting exhibits and affidavits. [Dkt. No. 32-34, 97-99]. Plaintiff received the notice required by Local Rule 7(K) and Roseboro v. Garrison. 528 F.2d 309(4th Cir. 1975)[Dkt. Nos. 33, 98], and he has responded.[Dkt. Nos. 103, 110]. Defendant Waltz has filed a motion to dismiss.[Dkt. No. 130]. Plaintiff received the notice required by Local Rule 7(K)and Roseboro [Dkt. No. 132], but he has not responded. Thus, the 'Simmons was released from custody on May II, 2021.[Dkt. No. 60]. ^ Defendant Whitaker has not been served. The Court listed the efforts that have been made to perfect service on defendant Whitaker in its Order dated December 15,2021 Order [Dkt. No. 134], and then directed plaintiff to provide an address for service within twenty-one days ofthe date of that order or show cause within the same twenty-one days"why this civil action should not be dismissed pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 4{m) with respect to defendant Whitaker." [Id. at 2]. Despite Plaintiff having been out of custody for approximately eight months, he has not perfected service on defendant Whitaker. Further, in response to the December 15,2021 Order, Plaintiff has neither provided an address nor shown cause why Whitaker should not be dismissed. Accordingly, defendant Whitaker will be dismissed without prejudice pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 4(m). Dockets.Justia.com Case 1:20-cv-00464-TSE-IDD Document 136 Filed 01/25/22 Page 2 of 15 PageID# 748 Case 1:20-cv-00464-TSE-IDD Document 136 Filed 01/25/22 Page 3 of 15 PageID# 749 Case 1:20-cv-00464-TSE-IDD Document 136 Filed 01/25/22 Page 4 of 15 PageID# 750 Case 1:20-cv-00464-TSE-IDD Document 136 Filed 01/25/22 Page 5 of 15 PageID# 751 Case 1:20-cv-00464-TSE-IDD Document 136 Filed 01/25/22 Page 6 of 15 PageID# 752 Case 1:20-cv-00464-TSE-IDD Document 136 Filed 01/25/22 Page 7 of 15 PageID# 753 Case 1:20-cv-00464-TSE-IDD Document 136 Filed 01/25/22 Page 8 of 15 PageID# 754 Case 1:20-cv-00464-TSE-IDD Document 136 Filed 01/25/22 Page 9 of 15 PageID# 755 Case 1:20-cv-00464-TSE-IDD Document 136 Filed 01/25/22 Page 10 of 15 PageID# 756 Case 1:20-cv-00464-TSE-IDD Document 136 Filed 01/25/22 Page 11 of 15 PageID# 757 Case 1:20-cv-00464-TSE-IDD Document 136 Filed 01/25/22 Page 12 of 15 PageID# 758 Case 1:20-cv-00464-TSE-IDD Document 136 Filed 01/25/22 Page 13 of 15 PageID# 759 Case 1:20-cv-00464-TSE-IDD Document 136 Filed 01/25/22 Page 14 of 15 PageID# 760 Case 1:20-cv-00464-TSE-IDD Document 136 Filed 01/25/22 Page 15 of 15 PageID# 761

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.