Franklin v. Beeville City, Texas

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT October 29, 2020 FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS David J. Bradley, Clerk CORPUS CHRISTI DIVISION BENJAMIN FRANKLIN, § § Plaintiff, § VS. § CIVIL NO. 2:17-CV-370 § BEEVILLE CITY, TEXAS, et al, § § Defendants. § ORDER AND FINAL JUDGMENT On August 7, 2020, this Court adopted the Magistrate Judge’s Memorandum and Recommendation, granted Defendants’ motion for summary judgment, and dismissed Plaintiff Benjamin Franklin’s (“Franklin”) claims. Dkt. No. 129. Franklin filed a motion to alter judgment. Dkt. No. 130. The Magistrate Judge issued a Memorandum and Recommendation to Deny Franklin’s Motion to Alter Judgment. Dkt. No. 131. Franklin filed objections to the Memorandum and Recommendation regarding the Motion to Alter Judgment. Dkt. No. 132. The Magistrate Judge states that Franklin only makes conclusory assertions that his complaint was wrongfully dismissed, and he fails to make specific argument regarding the motion to alter judgment. Dkt. No. 131. Franklin’s objections state there were discovery violations by Defendants. Dkt. No. 132. Franklin’s objections are frivolous and unrelated to his motion to alter judgment. See Battle v. United States Parole Comm’n, 834 F.2d 419 (5th Cir. 1987). The Court OVERRULES Franklin’s objections, Dkt. No. 132. The Court ADOPTS the Magistrate Judge’s Memorandum and Recommendation in its entirety, Dkt. No. 131, and DENIES Franklin’s Motion to Alter Judgment, Dkt. No. 130. Following this Court’s order granting summary judgment and dismissing all remaining claims in this action, Dkt. No. 129, the Court DIRECTS the Clerk of the Court to enter Final Judgment and close the case. SIGNED this 27th day of October, 2020. Hilda Tagle Senior United States District Judge 2/2