Minnis v. Secretary Department of Corrections ( 2019 )

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA Case No. 17-cv-20575-GAYLES/REID BOBBY MINNIS, Plaintiff, v. GEO CORPORATION, et al., Defendants. / ORDER AFFIRMING AND ADOPTING REPORT OF MAGISTRATE JUDGE THIS CAUSE comes before the Court on Magistrate Judge Lisette Reid’s Report of Magistrate Judge (the “Report”) [ECF No. 296]. Plaintiff Bobby Minnis filed a pro se Amended Complaint for Violation of Civil Rights, pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983, and was permitted to proceed in forma pauperis. [ECF Nos. 6 & 20]. The case was referred to Judge Patrick A. White for a Report and Recommendation, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) [ECF No. 3], and was later reassigned to Judge Reid [ECF No. 195]. The Report recommends that Defendants’, Jules Heller, M.D., Marie Amede, ARNP, and Leona F. Bennett, LPN (collectively, the “Defendants”), Consolidated Motion for Summary Judgment (the “Motion”) [ECF No. 232] be denied because genuine issues of material fact exist regarding (1) whether Plaintiff told Defendants of his assault, (2) whether Defendants were deliberately indifferent to his rib injuries, and (3) whether Defendants were deliberately indifferent to his sexual assault-related injuries. No objections were filed. A district court may accept, reject, or modify a magistrate judge’s report and recommendation. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). Those portions of the report and recommendation to which objection is made are accorded de novo review, if those objections “pinpoint the specific findings that the party disagrees with.” United States v. Schultz, 565 F.3d 1353, 1360 (11th Cir. 2009); see also Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b)(3). Any portions of the report and recommendation to which no specific objection is made are reviewed only for clear error. Liberty Am. Ins. Grp., Inc. v. WestPoint Underwriters, L.L.C., 199 F. Supp. 2d 1271, 1276 (M.D. Fla. 2001); accord Macort v. Prem, Inc., 208 F. App’x 781, 784 (11th Cir. 2006). The Court, having reviewed the record for clear error, agrees with Judge Reid’s analysis and findings that Defendants’ Motion must be denied. Accordingly, it is ORDERED AND ADJUDGED as follows: (1) Judge Reid’s Report [ECF No. 296] is AFFIRMED AND ADOPTED and incorporated into this Order by reference; and (2) Defendants’ Consolidated Motion for Summary Judgment [ECF No. 232] is DENIED. DONE AND ORDERED in Chambers at Miami, Florida, this 6th day of November, 2019. td & DARRIN P. GAYLES UNITED STATES DIS/RACT JUDGE