Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Amy M. Wery v. Nddocr

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF NORTH DAKOTA SOUTHWESTERN DIVISION


September 17, 2012

AMY M. WERY, PLAINTIFF,
v.
NDDOCR, ET AL. DEFENDANTS.

The opinion of the court was delivered by: Daniel L. Hovland, District Judge United States District Court

ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION

Before the Court is Magistrate Judge Karen Klein's Report and Recommendation filed on August 28, 2012. See Docket No. 109. In the Report and Recommendation, Judge Klein makes the following recommendation:

It is RECOMMENDED that the County Defendants' motion for summary judgment (Doc. #50) be GRANTED, the State Defendants' motion for summary judgment (Doc. #77) be GRANTED, the County Defendants' motion to dismiss (Doc. #50) be found as MOOT, and Wery's amended complaint (Doc. #20) be DISMISSED with prejudice. It is also RECOMMENDED that the court find any appeal would be frivolous, could not be taken in good faith, and may not be taken in forma pauperis.

See Docket No. 109, p. 29. Objections to the Report and Recommendation were due on or before September 10, 2012. No objections were filed.

The Court has carefully reviewed the Report and Recommendation, the relevant case law, and the entire record, and finds the Report and Recommendation to be persuasive. Accordingly, the Court ADOPTS the Report and Recommendation (Docket No. 20) in its entirety and ORDERS as follows:

1) The motion for summary judgment (Docket No. 50) filed by defendants DWCRC, SWMCC, Sean Bowen, Colby Braun, Don Hanel, Jessie Hauschild, Heather Luchi, DeeAnn Marsch, Gary Morel, Jo Rooks, Sandra Sund, and Angie Wanek is GRANTED;

2) The motion for summary judgment (Docket No. 77) filed by defendants NDDOCR, LeeAnn Bertsch, Terry Enzminger and Barb McGillvary is GRANTED;

3) The motion to dismiss (Docket No. 50) is found to be MOOT;

4) Wery's amended complaint (Docket No. 20) is DISMISSED with prejudice; and

5) That any appeal by Wery would be frivolous, could not be taken in good faith, and may not be taken in forma pauperis.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Daniel L. Hovland

20120917

© 1992-2012 VersusLaw Inc.



Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.