From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Kennedy v. Casey

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT MIDDLE DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA
Jul 10, 2019
CIVIL ACTION NO. 3:19-67 (M.D. Pa. Jul. 10, 2019)

Opinion

CIVIL ACTION NO. 3:19-67

07-10-2019

EDWARD THOMAS KENNEDY Plaintiff v. MARIA CASEY, et al. Defendants


( ) ORDER

Presently before the court is the report and recommendation of Magistrate Judge William I. Arbuckle ("Report"), which recommends that the plaintiff Edward Thomas Kennedy's ("Kennedy") complaint (Doc. 1) be dismissed. (Doc. 15). On July 6, 2019, Kennedy electronically filed several documents, one of which is described as a reply brief to Judge Arbuckle's Report. See (Doc. 17). Upon review, Kennedy's filings all relate to the order to show cause issued by this court, and therefore can not be construed as objections to Judge Arbuckle's Report.

When no objections are made to the report and recommendation of a magistrate judge, the court should, as a matter of good practice, "satisfy itself that there is no clear error on the face of the record in order to accept the recommendation." Fed.R.Civ.P. 72(b); advisory committee notes; see also Univac Dental Co. v. Dentsply Intern., Inc., 702 F.Supp.2d 465, 469 (M.D.Pa. 2010) (citing Henderson v. Carlson, 812 F.2d 874, 878 (3d Cir. 1987) (explaining judges should give some review to every report and recommendation)). Nevertheless, whether timely objections are made or not, the district court may accept, not accept, or modify, in whole or in part, the findings or recommendations made by the magistrate judge. 28 U.S.C. §636(b)(1); M.D.Pa. L.R. 72.31.

The court finds that Judge Arbuckle used proper reasoning and evidence to support his Report and arrived at a legally-sound conclusion. As such, Judge Arbuckle's Report is adopted in its entirety as the opinion of this court. Furthermore, the court finds that granting Kennedy leave to amend his complaint would be futile.

NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT:

(1) Judge Arbuckle's Report (Doc. 15) is ADOPTED IN ITS ENTIRETY;

(2) Kennedy's complaint (Doc. 1) is DISMISSED; and

(3) The Clerk of Court is directed to CLOSE this case.

/s/ _________

MALACHY E. MANNION

United States District Judge DATE: July 10, 2019
19-67-03


Summaries of

Kennedy v. Casey

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT MIDDLE DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA
Jul 10, 2019
CIVIL ACTION NO. 3:19-67 (M.D. Pa. Jul. 10, 2019)
Case details for

Kennedy v. Casey

Case Details

Full title:EDWARD THOMAS KENNEDY Plaintiff v. MARIA CASEY, et al. Defendants

Court:UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT MIDDLE DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA

Date published: Jul 10, 2019

Citations

CIVIL ACTION NO. 3:19-67 (M.D. Pa. Jul. 10, 2019)

Citing Cases

Kennedy v. Borough of Minersville Pa.

As such, the Report and Recommendation is reviewed for clear error, and finding none, it will be adopted.…

Kennedy v. Borough of Frackville Pa.

Undeterred by his lack of success in the Eastern District, Kennedy also brought numerous cases in this court,…