Smith v. Locker

FILED November 21, 2024 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS WESTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS BY: NM SAN ANTONIO DIVISION DEPUTY RONALD SMITH, § Plaintiff, : v. : CIVIL NO. SA-23-CV-881-OLG ROBERT LOCKER, et ai., : Defendants. : ORDER The Court has considered United States Magistrate Judge Elizabeth S. Chestney’s (“Judge Chestney”) Report and Recommendation (the “Recommendation”) (Dkt. No. 36), filed on November 5, 2024, concerning Defendants Robert Locker (“Locker”), Hunter Saenz (“Saenz”), and Jimmy Gonzalez’s (“Gonzalez”) (collectively, “Defendants”) Motion for Summary Judgment (the “Motion for Summary Judgment’) (Dkt. No. 31). In the Recommendation, Judge Chestney recommended that the Motion for Summary Judgment be granted in part and denied in part.

Dkt. No. 36 at 1, 21-22. Plaintiff Ronald Smith (‘Plaintiff’) and Defendants each filed objections to the Recommendation. See Dkt. Nos. 38-39.

When a party objects to a Magistrate Judge’s report and recommendation, the Court conducts a de novo review as to those portions of the report and recommendation to which an objection is made. See 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1); FED. R. Civ. P. 72(b); United States v. Wilson, 864 F.2d 1219, 1221 (Sth Cir. 1989). Frivolous, conclusory, or general objections need not be considered by the district court. See Battle v. U.S. Parole Comm’n, 834 F.2d 419, 421 (5th Cir. 1987). Any portions of the Magistrate Judge’s finding or recommendation that were not objected to are reviewed for clear error. Wilson, 864 F.2d at 1221.

The Court has conducted a de novo review of those portions of the Recommendation subject to the objections and is of the opinion that the Recommendation is correct, and that the objections are without merit as to the ultimate findings of the Magistrate Judge. Accordingly, the objections are OVERRULED, the Recommendation (Dkt. No. 36) is ACCEPTED and, for the reasons set forth therein, the Motion for Summary Judgment (Dkt. No. 31) is GRANTED IN PART and DENIED IN PART.

IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that Plaintiff’s malicious prosecution and false arrest claims are DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE. Only Plaintiff's excessive force claim against Saenz and Gonzalez will proceed to trial.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

SIGNED this MD ey of November, 2024. OK, Ae ORLANDO L. GARCIA UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE "yy