Summary
In Dalrymple v. Dooley, 2014 WL 4987596, *5 (D.S.D. Oct. 6, 2014), the court identified respite areas as a factor in finding that the Barracks at MDSP did not violate plaintiff's Eighth Amendment rights to humane conditions. If such areas were not available, it is possible that conditions could be inhumane.
Summary of this case from Brakeall v. Stanwick-KlemikOpinion
CIV. 12-4098-KES
10-06-2014
ORDER ADOPTING MAGISTRATE JUDGE'S REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION AND GRANTING MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT
Plaintiffs, Daniel R. Dalrymple and Leslie W. White, Jr., filed this lawsuit pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. The case was referred to Magistrate Judge John Simko pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) for the purpose of conducting any necessary hearings, including evidentiary hearings. Defendants filed a motion for summary judgment on May 9, 2014.
On September 11, 2014, Magistrate Judge Simko submitted his report and recommended that defendants' motion for summary judgment be granted. Docket 172. Dalrymple and White were notified in the report and recommendation that they had 14 days to file objections to the report. Even though no objections were filed that would require de novo review under Thompson v. Nix, 897 F.2d 356 (8th Cir. 1990), the court reviewed the matter de novo and finds that the magistrate judge's report and recommendation is adopted in full. Therefore, it is
ORDERED that the report and recommendation of Magistrate Judge Simko (Docket 172) is adopted in full and the motion for summary judgment is granted.
Dated October 6, 2014.
BY THE COURT:
/s/ Karen E. Schreier
KAREN E. SCHREIER
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE