Jackson v. Swift Transport et al, No. 3:2008cv00743 - Document 232 (M.D. Tenn. 2010)
Court Description: ORDER: For the reasons explained in the accompanying Memorandum, the Court enters the following rulings: Report and Recommendations 189 is Accepted and Approved and Plaintiff's Objections thereto 204 are Overruled. Report and Recommendations 214 is Accepted and Approved and Plaintiff's Objections thereto 223 are hereby Overruled. Plaintiff's Motion for Summary Judgment 145 is Denied. Defendants' Motion for Summary Judgment 186 is Granted. Plaintiff's Compla int against Defendants is hereby DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE. Plaintiff's Motion to Compel 222 is Denied. Entry of this Order on the docket shall constitute entry of final judgment in accordance with Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 58 and 79(a). Signed by Senior Judge Robert Echols on 4/9/10. (xc:Pro se party by regular and certified mail.)(dt)
Download PDF
<![CDATA[
Jackson v. Swift Transport et al Doc. 232 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT MIDDLE DISTRICT OF TENNESSEE NASHVILLE DIVISION JERRI LEIGH JACKSON, Plaintiff, v. SWIFT TRANSPORT, et al., Defendants. ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) No. 3:08-0743 Judge Echols ORDER For the reasons explained in the accompanying Memorandum, the Court enters the following rulings: (1) The Report and Recommendation (Docket Entry No. 189) which recommends denial of Plaintiff’s Motion for Summary Judgment (Docket Entry No. 145) is hereby ACCEPTED and APPROVED and Plaintiff’s Objections thereto (Docket Entry No. 204) are hereby OVERRULED; (2) The Report and Recommendation (Docket Entry No. 214) which recommends that Defendants’ Motion for Summary Judgment (Docket Entry No. 186) be granted is hereby ACCEPTED and APPROVED and Plaintiff’s Objections thereto (Docket Entry No. 223) are hereby OVERRULED; (3) Plaintiff’s Motion for Summary Judgment (Docket Entry No. 145) is hereby DENIED; (4) Defendants’ Motion for Summary Judgment (Docket Entry No. 186) is hereby GRANTED; (5) Plaintiff’s Complaint against Defendants is hereby DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE; and Dockets.Justia.com (6) Plaintiff’s “Motion to Compel Sealments” (Docket Entry No. 222) is hereby DENIED. Entry of this Order on the docket shall constitute entry of final judgment in accordance with Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 58 and 79(a). It is so ORDERED. ____________________________________ ROBERT L. ECHOLS 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.
