Barley v. Jamison et al (INMATE1)

Filing 95

ORDER directing as follows: (1) Mr. Barley's objections (Doc. # 94 ) are OVERRULED; (2) The Recommendation (Doc. # 90 ) is ADOPTED; (3) Defendants' motions for summary judgment (see Docs. # 28 , 29 , 36 , 37 , and 56 ) are GRANTED; (4) This is case is DISMISSED with prejudice, as further set out. Signed by Chief Judge William Keith Watkins on 1/16/14. (scn, )

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF ALABAMA
NORTHERN DIVISION
DANIEL M. BARLEY,
Plaintiff,
v.
RICHARD ALLEN, et al.,
Defendants.

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

CASE NO. 2:10-CV-989-WKW

ORDER
On October 4, 2013 the Magistrate Judge filed a Recommendation in this
case. (Doc. # 90.) On November 22, 2013, Plaintiff Daniel M. Barley filed
objections. (Doc. # 94.) The court has conducted an independent and de novo
review of those portions of the Recommendation to which the objections are made.
See 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). The court concludes that the objections are without
merit, and the Magistrate Judge’s Recommendation is due to be adopted.
Accordingly, it is ORDERED as follows:
1.

Mr. Barley’s objections (Doc. # 94) are OVERRULED;

2.

The Recommendation (Doc. # 90) is ADOPTED;

3.

Defendants’ motions for summary judgment (see Docs. # 28, 29, 36,

37, and 56) are GRANTED;
4.

This is case is DISMISSED with prejudice.

A separate final judgment will be entered.
DONE this 16th day of January, 2014.
/s/ W. Keith Watkins
CHIEF UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

2