Opinion

Hengst, Jr. v. PrimeCare Medical, Inc.

Court
District Court, M.D. Pennsylvania
Filed
Aug 10, 2023
Cited by
0 cases
Authority
More cited than 29.2%

The opinion

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA

ROBERT EDWARD HENGST, JR., No. 3:20-CV-02023

Plaintiff, (Chief Judge Brann)

v. (Magistrate Judge Saporito)

PRIMECARE MEDICAL, INC., et al.,

Defendants.

ORDER

AUGUST 10, 2023

Robert Edward Hengst, Jr., filed this civil rights complaint alleging that

Defendants violated his rights in numerous ways.1 On July 21, 2023, Magistrate

Judge Joseph F. Saporito, Jr. issued a Report and Recommendation recommending

that this Court grant Defendants’ motion for summary judgment and dismiss any

claims remaining in this matter.2 Hengst did not filed timely objections to the Report

and Recommendation.

Where no objection is made to a report and recommendation, this Court will

review the recommendation only for clear error.3 Conversely, “[i]f a party objects

timely to a magistrate judge’s report and recommendation, the district court must

1 Doc. 1.

2 Doc. 52.

3 Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b), advisory committee notes; see Henderson v. Carlson, 812 F.2d 874, 878

(3d Cir. 1987) (explaining that court should in some manner review recommendations

‘make a de novo determination of those portions of the report or specified proposed

findings or recommendations to which objection is made.’”4 Regardless of whether

timely objections are made, district courts may accept, reject, or modify—in whole

or in part—the magistrate judge’s findings or recommendations.5 Upon review of

the record, the Court finds no clear error in Magistrate Judge Saporito’s

recommendation that the Court grant partial summary judgment in Defendants’

favor and dismiss any remaining claims. Consequently, IT IS HEREBY

ORDERED that:

1. Magistrate Judge Joseph F. Saporito Jr.’s Report and Recommendation

(Doc. 52) is ADOPTED;

2. Defendants’ motion for summary judgment (Doc. 46) is GRANTED

and judgment is entered in favor of York County Prison Board, David

Frey, Steve Bolding, Ronnie Belt, and Nathan Fitzkee as to Hengst’s

42 U.S.C. § 1983 municipal liability, excessive force, and retaliation

claims;

3. All claims against PrimeCare Medical, Inc. and any remaining § 1983

claims against David Frey, Steve Bolding, Ronnie Belt, and Nathan

Fitzkee are DISMISSED; and

4. The Clerk of Court is directed to CLOSE this case.

4 Equal Emp’t Opportunity Comm’n v. City of Long Branch, 866 F.3d 93, 99 (3d Cir. 2017)

(quoting 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)).

BY THE COURT:

s/ Matthew W. Brann

Matthew W. Brann

Chief United States District Judge

This is a copy of a public record, reproduced as it was published. It is not legal advice, and it may not be the version a court would rely on. Check the official source before you cite it.

A word about cookies

We need a few to keep you signed in and the library working. The rest help us see which pages people use and where they get stuck. They stay off unless you say yes.