Summary
In Plaster v. Brown, 2006 WL 240866 (W.D. Va. Feb. 1, 2006), the district court disagreed with the magistrate judge's finding that the prosecutor's conduct giving the sheriffs advice about the existence of probable cause constituted the "initiation of prosecution."
Summary of this case from RIOS v. DOÑA ANA COUNTYOpinion
Civil Action No. 6:05-CV-00006.
February 1, 2006
ORDER
By order of the Court, this case was referred to the Honorable Michael F. Urbanski, United States Magistrate Judge, for proposed findings of fact and a recommended disposition of the Fed.R.Civ.P. 12(b)(6) motions to dismiss filed by Defendants Mike Brown and Randy Krantz. Judge Urbanski filed his Report and Recommendation on November 9, 2005, recommending that the Court grant Krantz's motion to dismiss on grounds of immunity. Judge Urbanski also recommended that the Court grant Brown's motion to dismiss on the grounds that 42 U.S.C. § 1983 does not support claims based on a respondeat superior theory. Plaintiff filed Objections to the Report and Recommendation on November 28, 2005, and a hearing was held on Plaintiff's objections on January 24, 2006.
The Court has thoroughly examined Plaintiff's objections, the applicable law, and the documented record. For the reasons stated in the accompanying memorandum opinion, the Court ADOPTS WITH MODIFICATION of the reasoning the Report and Recommendation of Magistrate Urbanski. Defendants Krantz and Brown are hereby DISMISSED as party-defendants in this matter.
It is so ORDERED.
The Clerk of the Court is hereby directed to send a certified copy of this Order to all counsel of record.