Reese v. Shashy et al (INMATE 1)

Filing 16

ORDER that the 15 Recommendation is ADOPTED as follows: (1) Plaintiff's claims for declaratory and injunctive relief with respect to orders/actions undertaken by Judge William Shashy are DISMISSED with prejudice in accordance with the directiv es of 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B)(i); (2) Plaintiff's claims for damages against Judge William Shashy are DISMISSED with prejudice pursuant to the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B)(iii); (3) Plaintiff's claims regarding a cons piracy are DISMISSED with prejudice under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B)(ii); and (4) This action, with respect to the conditions claims against Defendants Thomas and Bentley, are REFERRED back to the Magistrate Judge for appropriate proceedings. Signed by Chief Judge William Keith Watkins on 4/9/2012. (jg, )

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF ALABAMA
NORTHERN DIVISION
JOE REESE, #192825,

)
)
)
)
) CASE NO. 2:12-CV-57-WKW
)
)
)
)

Plaintiff,
v.
JUDGE WILLIAM SHASHY, et al.,
Defendants.

ORDER
There being no objections filed to the Recommendation of the Magistrate
Judge (Doc. # 15), and upon an independent review of the file in this case, it is
ORDERED that the Recommendation is ADOPTED.
It is further ORDERED as follows:
(1)

Plaintiff’s claims for declaratory and injunctive relief with respect to

orders/actions undertaken by Judge William Shashy are DISMISSED with prejudice
in accordance with the directives of 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B)(i);
(2)

Plaintiff’s claims for damages against Judge William Shashy are

DISMISSED with prejudice pursuant to the provisions of 28 U.S.C.
§ 1915(e)(2)(B)(iii);
(3)

Plaintiff’s claims regarding a conspiracy are DISMISSED with prejudice

under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B)(ii); and

(4)

This action, with respect to the conditions claims against Defendants

Thomas and Bentley, are REFERRED back to the Magistrate Judge for appropriate
proceedings.
DONE this 9th day of April, 2012.
/s/ W. Keith Watkins
CHIEF UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

2