Martin v. Dotson et al (INMATE 2)

Filing 99

OPINION AND ORDER: it is ORDERED and ADJUDGED as follows: 1) The 98 Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge be and is hereby ADOPTED; 2) The dfts' 86 motion for summary judgment be and is hereby GRANTED; 3) Judgment is GRANTED in favor of the Dfts; 4) This case be and is hereby DISMISSED without prejudice as Plf's claims are not properly before the court in this action; 5) Costs are taxed against Plf for which execution may issue; An appropriate Final Judgment will be entered. Signed by Chief Judge Emily C. Marks on 3/12/2019. (alm, )

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF ALABAMA
SOUTHERN DIVISION
DANIEL JESUS MARTIN,

)
)
Plaintiff,
)
)
v.
)
)
OFFICER MIKE (CPL) DOTSON, et al.,
)
)
Defendants.
)
_______________________________________
DANIEL JESUS MARTIN,
Plaintiff,
v.
LT. MICHAEL BRYAN,
Defendants.

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

CIV. ACT. NO. 1:16-cv-58-ECM
[WO]

CIV. ACT. NO. 1:16-cv-245-ECM
[WO]

OPINION and ORDER
On January 29, 2019, the Magistrate Judge filed a Recommendation in this case to
which no timely objections have been filed. (Doc. 98). After an independent and de novo
review of the record, and upon consideration of the Recommendation of the Magistrate
Judge, it is
ORDERED and ADJUDGED as follows:
(1) The Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge (doc. 98) be and is hereby
ADOPTED.

(2) The defendants’ motion for summary judgment (doc. 86) be and is hereby
GRANTED.
(3) Judgment is GRANTED in favor of the Defendants.
(4) This case be and is hereby DISMISSED without prejudice as Plaintiff’s claims
are not properly before the court in this action.
(5) Costs are taxed against Plaintiff for which execution may issue.
An appropriate Final Judgment will be entered.
DONE this 12th day of March, 2019.

/s/ Emily C. Marks
EMILY C. MARKS
CHIEF UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE