Parker v. Hawthorne (INMATE 1)
Filing
10
ORDER AND OPINION that the 9 Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge be and is hereby ADOPTED and that: 1. To the extent the plaintiff seeks relief under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, the claims are DISMISSED pursuant to the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B)(I). 2. The plaintiff's pendent state law claims are DISMISSED as the court deems it inappropriate to exercise supplemental jurisdiction over these claims. 3. This case is summarily DISMISSED. Signed by Honorable Judge W. Harold Albritton, III on 4/19/2012. (jg, )
IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES
FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF ALABAMA
NORTHERN DIVISION
RONNIE ODELL PARKER, #162167,
Plaintiff,
v.
RAYMOND JAMES HAWTHORNE,
Defendants.
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
CIVIL ACTION NO. 2:12cv233-WHA
(WO)
ORDER AND OPINION
On March 26, 2012, the Magistrate Judge filed a Recommendation in this case to
which no timely objections have been filed. (Doc. # 9). Upon an independent review of the
file in this case and upon consideration of the Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge, it
is
ORDERED and ADJUDGED that the Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge be
and is hereby ADOPTED and that:
1.
To the extent the plaintiff seeks relief under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, the claims are
DISMISSED pursuant to the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B)(I).
2.
The plaintiff’s pendent state law claims are DISMISSED as the court deems
it inappropriate to exercise supplemental jurisdiction over these claims.
3.
This case is summarily DISMISSED.
Done this the 19th day of April, 2012.
/s/ W. Harold Albritton
SENIOR UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
2
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?