Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Robert L. Holbrook v. Captain John Kingston

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA


September 15, 2011

ROBERT L. HOLBROOK, PLAINTIFF,
v.
CAPTAIN JOHN KINGSTON, ET AL., DEFENDANTS.

The opinion of the court was delivered by: Sean J. McLaughlin United States District Judge

MEMORANDUM ORDER

This civil rights action was received by the Clerk of Court on February 24, 2010 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 [ECF No. 30], filed on August 4, 2011, recommended that the motion to dismiss [ECF No. 25] be granted in part and denied in part. Specifically, the Magistrate Judge recommended that the interference with legal and non-legal mail claims be dismissed since they are barred by the statute of limitations, and that the retaliation claim remain pending as it is not completely barred by the statute of limitations and Plaintiff has not failed to state a prima facie claim upon which relief may be granted. The parties were allowed fourteen (14) days from the date of service to file objections. Plaintiff filed objections [ECF No. 31] on August 18, 2011, and Defendants filed a response to the objections on September 6, 2011 [ECF. No. 32].

After de novo review of the documents in the case, together with the Report and Recommendation and objections thereto, I agree that the motion to dismiss should be denied with respect to the retaliation claim and adopt the Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendation with respect to this claim. The Report and Recommendation is not adopted, however, with respect to the interference with legal and non-legal mail claims. The Court finds that the continuing violation doctrine may apply to these claims as the Plaintiff has alleged that he was on mail watch until March 2008.

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the motion to dismiss [ECF No. 25] is DENIED with respect to the interference with legal and non-legal mail claims and DENIED with respect to the retaliation claim.

cm: All parties of record Susan Paradise Baxter, U.S. Magistrate Judge

20110915

© 1992-2011 VersusLaw Inc.



Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.