Jones v. Deangelo

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN SOUTHERN DIVISION MARTELL JONES, Plaintiff, Case No. 2:23-cv-12509 v. Honorable Susan K. DeClercq United States District Judge NELSON et al., Honorable Curtis Ivy, Jr. Defendants. United States Magistrate Judge ___________________________________/ ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION (ECF No. 39), AND GRANTING IN PART AND DENYING IN PART DEFENDANTS’ MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT (ECF No. 20) On January 2, 2025, Magistrate Judge Curtis Ivy, Jr., issued a report, ECF No. 39, recommending that this Court grant in part and deny in part the Motion for Summary, ECF No. 20, filed by Defendants Nelson, Doyle, and Heinonen.1 Judge Ivy provided 14 days to object, but the parties did not do so. They have therefore forfeited their right to appeal Judge Ivy’s findings. See Berkshire v. Dahl, 928 F.3d 520, 530–31 (6th Cir. 2019) (citing Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140, 149 (1985)).

Moreover, there is no prejudicial clear error in the report.

Accordingly, it is ORDERED that the Report and Recommendation, ECF No. 39, is ADOPTED.

1 The Complaint names this Defendant “Heindnen,” but Defendant spells his name “Heinonen.”

Further, it is ORDERED that Defendants’ Motion for Summary Judgment, ECF No. 20, is GRANTED IN PART AND DENIED IN PART, as follows: 1. The Motion is GRANTED as to Defendant Nelson. Plaintiff’s Complaint, ECF No. 1, is DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE as to Defendant Nelson.

2. The Motion is GRANTED IN PART and DENIED IN PART as to Defendant Doyle. The only claim against Doyle that survives is the one related to withholding water. Plaintiff’s Complaint, ECF No. 1, is DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE as to all other claims against Doyle.

3. The Motion is DENIED as to Defendant Heinonen.

This is not a final order and does not close the above-captioned case.

/s/Susan K. DeClercq SUSAN K. DeCLERCQ United States District Judge Dated: January 28, 2025