Murphy v. Giles et al (INMATE 2)

Filing 73

ORDER ADOPTING adopting 72 Report and Recommendations of the Magistrate Judge ; ORDER directing as follows: (1) plf's request for injunctive relief is DENIED as moot; (2) the Motion to Dismiss on behalf of the medical defs is GRANTED to th e extent the medical defs seek dismissal of this case due to plf's failure to properly exhaust an adminstrative remedy previously available to him in the Ala Dept of Corrections; (3) the Motion for Summary Judgment on behalf of the correctional Defs withrespect to the claims for monetary damages lodged against them in their official capacities is GRANTED as all Defs are entitled to absolute immunity from these claims; (4) the motion for summary judgment on behalf of the correction defs in their individual capacities is GRANTED; (5) This case is DISMISSED against the medical Defs with prejudice in accordance with the provisions of 42 U.S.C. 1997e(a) for the Plf's failure to properly exhaust an administrative remedy provided to him during his confinement in the ADOC as this remedy is no longer available to him with respect to the claim presented in this cause of action, and against the correctional Defs in accordance with F.R.Civ.P. 56. Signed by Honorable Judge W. Harold Albritton, III on 3/25/15. (djy, )

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

JIMMY MURPHY,
Plaintiff,
vs.
SANDRA GILES, Warden, et al.,
Defendants.

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

CASE NO. 2:12cv-224WHA
(WO)

ORDER
This case is before the court on the Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge (Doc. #72),
entered on March 2, 2015. There being no timely objection filed to the Recommendation, and
after a review of the file, the Recommendation is ADOPTED, and it is hereby ORDERED as
follows:
1. Plaintiff’s request for injunctive relief is DENIED as moot.
2. The motion to dismiss on behalf of the medical Defendants is GRANTED to the
extent the medical Defendants seek dismissal of this case due to Plaintiff’s failure to properly
exhaust an administrative remedy previously available to him in the Alabama Department of
Corrections.
3. The motion for summary judgment on behalf of the correctional Defendants with
respect to the claims for monetary damages lodged against them in their official capacities is
GRANTED as all Defendants are entitled to absolute immunity from these claims.
4. The motion for summary judgment filed on behalf of the correctional Defendants in
their individual capacities is GRANTED.

5. This case is DISMISSED against the medical Defendants with prejudice in accordance
with the provisions of 42 U.S.C. § 1997e(a) for the Plaintiff’s failure to properly exhaust an
administrative remedy provided to him during his confinement in the ADOC as this remedy is no
longer available to him with respect to the claim presented in this cause of action, and against the
correctional Defendants in accordance with F.R.Civ.P. 56.
DONE this 25th day of March, 2015.

/s/
W. Harold Albritton
W. HAROLD ALBRITTON
SENIOR UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE