From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Serrano v. Folino

United States District Court, W.D. Pennsylvania
Mar 16, 2008
Civil Action No. 05-1118 (W.D. Pa. Mar. 16, 2008)

Summary

replacing knee brace containing metal or plastic with knee brace without metal or plastic did not constitute deliberate indifference

Summary of this case from Tannenbaum v. State

Opinion

Civil Action No. 05-1118.

March 16, 2008


ORDER


The above captioned case was filed on August 11, 2005, and was referred to Magistrate Judge Lisa Pupo Lenihan for pretrial proceedings in accordance with the Magistrate Judge's Act, 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1), and Rules 72.1.3 and 72.1.4 of the Local Rules for Magistrate Judges.

The Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendation (doc. no. 111), filed on February 15, 2008, recommended that the Motion for Summary Judgment filed by Defendants Noel and Falor (doc. no. 88) be granted and that the Motion for Summary Judgment filed by the Commonwealth Defendants (doc. no. 96) be granted. All parties were served with the Report and Recommendation and Plaintiff filed Objections on February 29, 2008 (doc. nos. 112 113). After de novo review of the pleadings and documents in the case, together with the Report and Recommendation and the Objections thereto, the following order is entered:

AND NOW, this 13 day of March, 2008;

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the Motion for Summary Judgment filed by Defendants Noel and Falor (doc. no. 88) is GRANTED and the Motion for Summary Judgment filed by the Commonwealth Defendants (doc. no. 96) is GRANTED. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Report and Recommendation (doc. no. 111) of Magistrate Judge Lenihan, dated February 15, 2008, is adopted as the Opinion of the court.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that JUDGMENT is entered in favor of the Defendants and the Clerk of Court is directed to mark this case CLOSED. AND IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that pursuant to Rule 4(a)(1) of the Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure, Plaintiff has thirty (30) days to file a notice of appeal as provided by Rule 3 of the Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure.


Summaries of

Serrano v. Folino

United States District Court, W.D. Pennsylvania
Mar 16, 2008
Civil Action No. 05-1118 (W.D. Pa. Mar. 16, 2008)

replacing knee brace containing metal or plastic with knee brace without metal or plastic did not constitute deliberate indifference

Summary of this case from Tannenbaum v. State
Case details for

Serrano v. Folino

Case Details

Full title:DAVID SERRANO, Plaintiff, v. LOUIS FOLINO, Superintendent; THOMAS JACKSON…

Court:United States District Court, W.D. Pennsylvania

Date published: Mar 16, 2008

Citations

Civil Action No. 05-1118 (W.D. Pa. Mar. 16, 2008)

Citing Cases

Tannenbaum v. State

Moreover, many courts have recognized the inherent security threat in metal knee braces and have consistently…