From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Jones v. Lane

United States District Court, D. Colorado
Oct 4, 2006
Civil Action No. 06-cv-00116-EWN-MEH (D. Colo. Oct. 4, 2006)

Opinion

Civil Action No. 06-cv-00116-EWN-MEH.

October 4, 2006


ORDER ACCEPTING MAGISTRATE JUDGE'S RECOMMENDATION


This matter is before the court on the "Recommendation on Motions for Summary Judgment" filed August 30, 2006. No party has objected to the recommendation. I have conducted the requisite de novo review of the issues, the record, and the recommendation. Based on this review, I have concluded that the recommendation is a correct application of the facts and the law. Accordingly, it is

ORDERED as follows:

1. The recommendation is ACCEPTED.

2. Plaintiff's Motion for Summary Judgment (#29) is DENIED.

3. Defendant's Cross Motion for Summary Judgment (#35) is GRANTED, with prejudice, as to the first and second grounds for Plaintiff's Fourteenth Amendment claim, but DENIED with regard to the third.

4. The third ground for Plaintiff's Fourteenth Amendment claim is dismissed sua sponte, without prejudice, as being barred under Heck v. Humphrey.


Summaries of

Jones v. Lane

United States District Court, D. Colorado
Oct 4, 2006
Civil Action No. 06-cv-00116-EWN-MEH (D. Colo. Oct. 4, 2006)
Case details for

Jones v. Lane

Case Details

Full title:VERNEST M. JONES, Plaintiff, v. TANNYA LANE, C.O.P. III, individual and…

Court:United States District Court, D. Colorado

Date published: Oct 4, 2006

Citations

Civil Action No. 06-cv-00116-EWN-MEH (D. Colo. Oct. 4, 2006)

Citing Cases

Melnick v. Raemisch

A claim that would necessarily invalidate the state parole board's decision to revoke parole is barred by…