Berry v. Houston County et al (INMATE1)

Filing 25

ORDER adopting the 24 Recommendation; granting the 19 Motion for Summary Judgment to the extent defendants seek dismissal of this case due to the plaintiff's failure to properly exhaust an administrative remedy previously available to him at the Houston County Jail; dismissing the case with prejudice as further set out. Signed by Honorable W. Harold Albritton, III on 5/5/2011. (br, )

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES
FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF ALABAMA
SOUTHERN DIVISION
CLEVELAND BERRY, #217872,
Plaintiff,
v.

HOUSTON COUNTY, et al.,
Defendants.

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

CASE NO. 1:09-cv-88-WHA

ORDER
The Magistrate Judge entered a Recommendation (Doc. #24) in this case to which no
timely objections have been filed. After a review of the Recommendation, and after an
independent review of the entire record, the Court finds that the Recommendation should be
adopted. Accordingly, it is
ORDERED as follows:
1.

The defendants’ motion for summary judgment is GRANTED to the extent
defendants seek dismissal of this case due to the plaintiff’s failure to properly
exhaust an administrative remedy previously available to him at the Houston
County Jail; and

2.

this case is DISMISSED with prejudice in accordance with the provisions of
42 U.S.C. § 1997e(a) due to the plaintiff’s failure to properly exhaust an
administrative remedy provided to him during his confinement in the Houston
County Jail as such remedy is no longer available to him with respect to the

claims presenting in this cause of action.
A separate judgment shall issue.
DONE this 5th day May, 2011.

/s/ W. Harold Albritton
W. HAROLD ALBRITTON
SENIOR UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

2