Dobbins v. Hulett et al (INMATE1)

Filing 42

OPINION. Signed by Honorable Judge Myron H. Thompson on 5/26/2011. (cc, )

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES FOR THE
MIDDLE DISTRICT OF ALABAMA, NORTHERN DIVISION

WILLIAM GEOFFERY DOBBINS,
Plaintiff,
v.
J.C. GILES and LEWIS
HULETT,
Defendants.

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

CIVIL ACTION NO.
2:08cv895-MHT
(WO)

OPINION
Pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983, plaintiff William
Geoffery

Dobbins,

a

lawsuit

challenging

former
the

state

inmate,

constitutionality

filed
of

this

actions

taken against him by defendants J.C. Giles and Lewis
Hulett.

This lawsuit is now before the court on the

recommendation of the United States Magistrate Judge that
Giles and Hulett’s motion for summary judgment should be
granted

in

all

respects,

except

as

to

Dobbins’s

excessive-force claim against Hulett in his individual
capacity,

which,

according

should go to trial.

to

the

magistrate

judge,

Also before the court are Hulett’s

objections to the recommendation.

After an independent

and de novo review of the record, the court concludes
that Hulett’s objections should be overruled and the
magistrate judge’s recommendation adopted.
The court adds this comment.

Hulett argues, for the

first time, that Dobbins cannot recover for emotional
distress

because

such

damages

are

provisions of 42 U.S.C. § 1997e(e).

barred

by

the

Hulett concedes,

however, that he raised this argument for the first time
in his objections.

Thus, the argument was not included

in Hulett’s summary-judgment motion, nor was it presented
to the magistrate judge or addressed by the magistrate
judge in her recommendation.
before

the

court

is

Because the only matter
the

magistrate

judge’s

recommendation, Hulett’s argument is not really before
the court at this time.

In addition, because Hulett did

not present his argument earlier, Dobbins has not had an
opportunity

to

address

the

argument.

The

court,

therefore, declines to address the argument at this time.

2

If Hulett still wishes to pursue the argument, he should
file a separate motion that presents it or he can raise
the issue at trial.
An appropriate order will be entered.
DONE, this the 26th day of May, 2011.

/s/ Myron H. Thompson
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE