From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Jackson v. Pa Dep't of Corr.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA
Sep 26, 2017
C.A. No. 1:16-cv-133 (W.D. Pa. Sep. 26, 2017)

Opinion

C.A. No. 1:16-cv-133

09-26-2017

RHONSHAWN JACKSON, Plaintiff, v. PA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS, et al, Defendants.



Magistrate Judge Susan Paradise Baxter MEMORANDUM ORDER

This prisoner civil rights action was received by the Clerk of Court on June 8, 2016, and was referred to United States Magistrate Judge Susan Paradise Baxter for report and recommendation in accordance with the Magistrates Act, 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1), and Rules 72.1.3 and 72.1.4 of the Local Rules for Magistrates. The magistrate judge's report and recommendation, issued on July 10, 2017, recommended that Defendants' motion to dismiss (Dkt. 27) be granted in part and denied in part, and that the motion to dismiss (Dkt. 19) be dismissed as moot. Service was made on Plaintiff by mail at SCI Frackville, where he was incarcerated, and on Defendants. Objections to the report and recommendation were filed by Plaintiff on August 7, 2017. After de novo review of the complaint and documents in the case, and objections thereto, the following order is entered:

AND NOW, this 26th Day of September, 2017;

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Defendants' motion to dismiss [ECF No. 27] is granted in part and denied in part as follows:

(1) It is ORDERED that the motion to dismiss Plaintiff's Conspiracy and First Amendment claims against Defendants Carter, Hacherl, Haggerty, Dickey, McNaughton, Constanzo, Gilara, Oberlander and O'Brien are denied.

(2) It is ORDERED that the motion to dismiss Plaintiff's Eighth Amendment claims against Defendants Haggerty, Gilara, and Carter are denied, but that the motion to dismiss Plaintiff's Eighth Amendment claims against the remaining Defendants (Hacherl, Dickey, McNaughton, Costanzo, Oberlander, and O'Brien) is granted.

(3) It ORDERED that Defendants' motion to dismiss Plaintiff's Conspiracy and First, Eighth and Fourteenth Amendment claims against Defendants Martucci, Hicks, Robinson and Clark is granted.

(4) It is ORDERED that Defendants' motion to dismiss Plaintiff's claims for harassment, and interference with legal mail is denied.

(5) It is ORDERED that Defendants' motion to dismiss Plaintiff's loss or destruction of property is granted.

(6) It is ORDERED that the motion to dismiss filed by Defendants on October 26, 2016 (ECF No. 19) is denied as moot.

The report and recommendation of Magistrate Judge Baxter, issued July 10, 2017, is adopted as the opinion of the court.

September 26, 2017

/s/_________

KIM R. GIBSON

United States District Judge cc: Susan Paradise Baxter

U.S. Magistrate Judge

all parties of record ___


Summaries of

Jackson v. Pa Dep't of Corr.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA
Sep 26, 2017
C.A. No. 1:16-cv-133 (W.D. Pa. Sep. 26, 2017)
Case details for

Jackson v. Pa Dep't of Corr.

Case Details

Full title:RHONSHAWN JACKSON, Plaintiff, v. PA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS, et al…

Court:UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA

Date published: Sep 26, 2017

Citations

C.A. No. 1:16-cv-133 (W.D. Pa. Sep. 26, 2017)

Citing Cases

Mack v. Clark

And courts have held placement on RRL can meet the adverse action element because of its more restrictive…