Shaw v. Memphis Police Department
2:24-cv-02309
W.D. Tenn.Apr 13, 2025Background
- Plaintiff Tekeva Deshuna Shaw filed a complaint against the Memphis Police Department and others.
- The complaint was assigned to a Chief Magistrate Judge in the Western District of Tennessee.
- The Magistrate Judge issued a Report and Recommendation to dismiss the complaint under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B) for failure to state a claim.
- Shaw was given fourteen days to object to the Report but failed to file objections within the deadline (extended per federal rules).
- The District Court reviewed the Magistrate’s Report for clear error and found none.
- The District Judge adopted the Report in full and dismissed Shaw’s complaint.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Shaw’s complaint states a claim upon which relief can be granted | Shaw claims wrongdoing by Memphis Police Department | Dismiss for failure to state a claim | Complaint fails to state a claim and is dismissed |
| Whether dismissal is proper under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B) | Shaw seeks relief | Dismiss under §1915(e)(2)(B) for lack of merit | Dismissal proper under § 1915(e)(2)(B) |
| Whether court must review recommendations with no objections | Not argued | Not argued | No review required; Report adopted |
| Procedural deadlines for objections under federal rules | Not argued | Not argued | Court properly calculated and applied deadlines |
Key Cases Cited
- United States v. Curtis, 237 F.3d 598 (6th Cir. 2001) (discussing delegation of district court duties to magistrate judges)
- Gomez v. United States, 490 U.S. 858 (1989) (upholding use of magistrate judges for certain proceedings)
- Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140 (1985) (district courts need not review unobjected-to portions of a report and recommendation)
- Baker v. Peterson, [citation="67 F. App'x 308"] (6th Cir. 2003) (application of standards for reviewing magistrate recommendations)