Hernandez v. Victoria County et al

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS
VICTORIA DIVISION
JOE RICHARD HERNANDEZ, JR., 	§
§
§
§
§
§
§
§
§
Plaintiff,
V. 	CIVIL ACTION NO. 6:25-CV-00074
VCSO VICTORIA COUNTY SHERIFF
OFFICE, et al.,
Defendants.
ORDER ADOPTING MEMORANDUM & RECOMMENDATION
Before the Court is Magistrate Judge Julie K. Hampton's Order and Memorandum and
Recommendation ("M&R"). (D.E. 15). The M&R recommends that the Court retain and dismiss
Plaintiffs claims, (D.E. 5), as follows:
• 	Retain Plaintiffs municipal liability claim against Victoria County with respect to
its alleged policy or custom that restricts or denies inmates access to mental health
treatment;
• 	Dismiss with prejudice Plaintiffs Fourteenth Amendment due process claims
(episodic-acts-or-omissions 	claims) 	seeking 	compensatory 	damages 	against
Officers Williams and Baylor in their individual capacities as frivolous or for
failure to state a claim for relief;
• 	Dismiss with prejudice Plaintiffs Fourteenth Amendment deliberate indifference
claim (conditions-of-confinement claim) seeking compensatory damages against
Sheriff Marr in his individual capacity as frivolous or for failure to state a claim for
relief;
• 	Dismiss with prejudice Plaintiffs Fourteenth Amendment deliberate indifference
claims (episodic-acts-or-omissions claims) against Officers Williams and Baylor in
their individual capacities as frivolous or for failure to state a claim for relief; and
• 	Dismiss without prejudice Plaintiffs claims against Sheriff Marr, Officer Williams,
and Officer Baylor in their official capacities.
(D.E. 15, p. 1-2).
The parties were provided proper notice of, and the opportunity to object to, the Magistrate
Judge ' s M&R. See 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(l); FED. R. Clv. P. 72(b); General Order No. 2002-13. No
objection has been filed. When no timely objection has been filed, the district court need only
I / 2
United States District Court
Southern District of Texas
ENTERED
May 28, 2026
Nathan Ochsner, Clerk
Case 6:25-cv-00074 Document 31 Filed 05/28/26 in TXSD Page 1 of 2

determine whether the Magistrate Judge's M&R is clearly erroneous or contrary to law. United
States v. 	Wilson, 864 F.2d 1219, 1221 (5th Cir. 1989) (per curiam); Powell v. Litton Loan
Servicing, L.P. , No. 4:14-CV-02700, 2015 WL 3823141 , at* 1 (S .D. Tex. June 18 , 2015) (Harmon,
J.) (citation omitted).
Having reviewed the proposed findings and conclusions of the Magistrate Judge, the filings
of the parties, the record, and the applicable law, and finding that the M&R is not clearly erroneous
or contrary to law, the Court ADOPTS the M&R in its entirety. (D.E. 15). Accordingly, the Court:
• 	RETAINS Plaintiff's municipal liability claim against Victoria County with
respect to its alleged policy or custom that restricts or denies inmates access to
mental health treatment;
• 	DISMISSES with prejudice Plaintiff's Fourteenth Amendment due process
claims (episodic-acts-or-omissions claims) seeking compensatory damages against
Officers Williams and Baylor in their individual capacities as frivolous or for
failure to state a claim for relief;
• 	DISMISSES 	with 	prejudice 	Plaintiff's 	Fourteenth 	Amendment 	deliberate
indifference 	claim 	(conditions-of-confinement 	claim) 	seeking 	compensatory
damages against Sheriff Marr in his individual capacity as frivolous or for failure
to state a claim for relief;
• 	DISMISSES 	with 	prejudice 	Plaintiff's 	Fourteenth 	Amendment 	deliberate
indifference claims (episodic-acts-or-omissions claims) against Officers Williams
and Baylor in their individual capacities as frivolous or for failure to state a claim
for relief; and
• 	DISMISSES without prejudice Plaintiff's claims against Sheriff Marr, Officer
Williams, and Officer Baylor in their official capacities.
SO ORDERED.
DA 	S. MORALES
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
Signed: Corpus Christi, Texas
May z..q-Y;2, 026
2 / 2
Case 6:25-cv-00074 Document 31 Filed 05/28/26 in TXSD Page 2 of 2