Foster v. Barton et al, No. 2:2023cv03349 - Document 7 (E.D. La. 2023)
Court Description: ORDER AND REASONS ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS 6 Plaintiff's complaint is DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE. Signed by Judge Sarah S. Vance on 10/24/2023.(cs)
Download PDF
<![CDATA[
Foster v. Barton et al Doc. 7 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF LOUISIANA DEMETRIA A. FOSTER VERSUS CIVIL ACTION NO. 23-3349 DANIELLE BARTON, ET AL. SECTION “R” (1) ORDER AND REASONS Plaintiff Demetria Foster, proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis, filed this lawsuit against defendants Danielle Barton, Eldridge Phillips, Jennifer Hamburger, Giovan K. Jackson, Keisha Gaines, the American Red Cross, University Medical Center, Tulane Medical Center, Derdanra Washington, Louis Robinson, Sr., Diane Robinson, Brandy Green, Morris Bart, Mayor LaToya Cantrell, HANO, Edifie Security, Lekisha Foster Link, Chase Bank, and Shavon Duhon.1 On October 2, 2023, Magistrate Judge Janis van Meerveld issued a Report & Recommendation (“R&R”), recommending that the Court dismiss plaintiff’s complaint as legally frivolous and for failing to state a claim upon which relief can be granted.2 See 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B)(i) and (ii). 1 2 R. Doc. 1. R. Doc. 6. Dockets.Justia.com Plaintiff did not object to the R&R. Therefore, the Court reviews the R&R for clear error. See Douglass v. United Servs. Auto. Ass’n, 79 F.3d 1415, 1430 (5th Cir. 1996) (en banc), superseded by statute on other grounds, 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1); see also Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b) advisory committee’s note (1983) (“When no timely objection is filed, the court need only satisfy itself that there is no clear error on the face of the record in order to accept the recommendation.”). The Court finds no clear error. Accordingly, the Court adopts the Magistrate Judge’s R&R as its opinion. Plaintiff’s complaint is DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE. New Orleans, Louisiana, this _____ 24th day of October, 2023. _____________________ SARAH S. VANCE UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 2
]]>
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You
should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google
Privacy Policy and
Terms of Service apply.
