Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

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

Kemp v. Arpaio

United States District Court, D. Arizona

February 21, 2017

James L. Kemp, Plaintiff,
v.
Joseph M. Arpaio, et al., Defendants.

          ORDER

          Paul G. Rosenblatt United States District Judge.

         Having reviewed de novo the Report and Recommendation of Magistrate Judge Willett (Doc. 77) in light of Plaintiff's Objections to the Magistrate Judge's PLRA Mandated Report and Recommendations (Doc. 80), the Court finds that the plaintiff's objections should be overruled because the Court agrees with the Magistrate Judge's conclusions in her screening of the plaintiff's Second Amended Complaint (Doc. 76). Therefore, IT IS ORDERED that the Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendation (Doc. 77) is accepted and adopted by the Court.

         IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the plaintiff's claims in Count One of the Second Amended Complaint regarding the alleged assaults that occurred on April 7, 2010, August 6, 2010, and August 18, 2013 are dismissed.

         IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that defendants Garner, Brown, and Arpaio shall answer the Eighth Amendment failure to protect claim pertaining to the alleged September 8, 2014 assault in Count One of the Second Amended Complaint.

         IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the following counts of the Second Amended Complaint are dismissed: Count Two, Count Three, Count Four, Count Seven, Count Nine, Count Ten, Count Twelve, Count Thirteen, Count Fourteen, and Count Fifteen.

         IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that defendant Feraru shall answer Count Five of the Second Amended Complaint.

         IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that defendants Arpaio, Tenny, McKay, Fisk, and Chavira shall answer the First Amendment retaliation claim in Count Six of the Second Amended Complaint.

         IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the plaintiff's claims under 42 U.S.C. §§ 1985 and 1986 are dismissed.

         IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that defendants San Martin and Anders shall answer Count Eight of the Second Amended Complaint.

         IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the plaintiff's claims relating to incidents which occurred prior to September 2013 are dismissed as time-barred.

         IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that defendants Steinhauser, Burke, Guta, Bernal-Fulford, and Baerg shall answer Count Eleven of the Second Amended Complaint regarding alleged Eighth and Fourteenth Amendment medical claims arising from incidents dated October 18, 2013, September 9, 2014, and March 13, 2015.

         IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that defendants Arpaio, Alvarez, Tenny, and McKay shall answer Count Sixteen of the Second Amended Complaint.

         IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that defendants Maricopa County, Montgomery, Rada, Najera, Klages, Rubio, Shugart-LBJ-McKay Team, Flannery, Carper, Acosta, Flaggman, Balaji, Wade, Bretado, Cooper, Odom, Logan, Cruz, Lee, Angry, Hughes, Bruner, ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

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