# Welsh v. Correct Care Recovery Solutions

> District Court, N.D. Texas · October 18, 2022

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/10452049

## Case

- **Court:** District Court, N.D. Texas
- **Decided:** October 18, 2022
- **Opinion:** 100trialcourt
- **Cited by:** 0 later opinions in the Frix Law Library

## Citator (automated)

- No negative treatment found by the automated citator. That is not the same as a confirmation that the case is good law; read the citing cases.
- Full citator and citing cases: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/10452049

## Opinion text

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS
LUBBOCK DIVISION
LONNIE KADE WELSH, )
)
Plaintiff, )
)
v. )
)
CORRECT CARE RECOVERY )
SOLUTIONS, et al., )
)
Defendants. ) Civil Action No. 5:18-CV-020-C-BQ
ORDER
Before the Court is the Report and Recommendation of the United States Magistrate
Judge (ECF No. 195) therein advising the Court that: (1) Welsh’s motion to file supplemental
evidence (ECF No. 182) should be denied; (2) Defendant Ross Hester’s Motion to Strike (ECF
No. 190) should be granted and Welsh’s Sur-Reply (ECF No. 189) should be stricken; and (3)
Defendant Hester’s Motion for Summary Judgment on the issue of qualified immunity (ECF No.
173) should be granted. Plaintiff filed his Objections on October 17, 2022.
The Court conducts a de novo review of those portions of the Magistrate Judge’s report or
specified proposed findings or recommendations to which a timely objection is made. 28 U.S.C.
§ 636(b)(1)(C). Portions of the report or proposed findings or recommendations that are not the
subject of a timely objection will be accepted by the Court unless they are clearly erroneous or
contrary to law. See United States v. Wilson, 864 F.2d 1219, 1221 (5th Cir. 1989).
After due consideration and having conducted a de novo review, the Court finds that
Petitioner’s objections should be OVERRULED. The Court has further conducted an
independent review of the Magistrate Judge’s findings and conclusions and finds no error.
It is therefore ORDERED that the findings and conclusions contained in the Report and
Recommendation are hereby ADOPTED as the findings and conclusions of the Court.
For the reasons stated therein, the Court ORDERS that: (1) Plaintiff's Motion to File
Supplemental Evidence is DENIED; (2) Defendant Hester’s Motion to Strike is GRANTED and
Plaintiff's Sur-reply is STRICKEN; and (3) Defendant Hester’s Motion for Summary Judgment
on the Issue of Qualified Immunity is GRANTED and Plaintiffs claims against Defendant
Hester in his individual capacity are DISMISSED.
SO ORDERED.
Dated October 18, 2022.

SENIOR UNITEDSTATES DISTRICV JUDGE

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/10452049. Public record. Not legal advice.