Cox v. Allen et al (INMATE1) DO NOT ACCEPT DISCOVERY REQUESTS UNLESS HAVE LEAVE OF COURT
ORDER that: 1) ADOPTING 40 Report and Recommendations; 2) Defendants have filed special reports (docs. 10 , 18 , 20 ), in response to plaintiff's suit under 42 USC 1983, which reports the court construes as motions for summary judgment; See order (doc. 22 ) of 1/16/07; Defendants' motions for summary judgment (docs. 10 , 18 , 20 ) are granted for the reasons stated in the mag judge's recommendation. Signed by Honorable Myron H. Thompson on 5/8/09. (Attachments: # 1 appeals checklist)(vma, )
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF ALABAMA NORTHERN DIVISION DERRICK COX, #140603, Plaintiff, v. RICHARD ALLEN, et al., Defendants. ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )
CASE NO.: 2:06-cv-989-MHT (WO)
ORDER The magistrate judge entered a recommendation (Doc. #40) in this case to which no timely objections have been filed. After a review of the recommendation and after an independent and de novo review of the entire record, the court believes that the recommendation should be adopted. Accordingly, it is ORDERED that: (1) (2) The recommendation (Doc. #40) of the magistrate judge is adopted. Defendants have filed special reports (Docs. ##10, 18, 20), in response to
plaintiff's suit under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, which reports the court construes as motions for summary judgment. See order (Doc. #22) of January 16, 2007. Defendants' motions for summary judgment (Docs. ##10, 18, 20) are granted for the reasons stated in the magistrate judge's recommendation. An appropriate judgment will be entered. DONE, this the 8th day of May, 2009. /s/ Myron H. Thompson UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?