Flournoy v. Harris et al (INMATE 2)

Filing 14

ORDER adopting 11 REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS; that Plaintiff's complaint seeking enforcement of prior injunctive orders of the court is DISMISSED with prejudice prior to service of process pursuant to the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e) (2)(B)(ii); that Plaintiff's Section 1983 claims against Defendants Thomas, Barry, and Edwards are dismissed with prejudice prior to service of process pursuant to the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B)(i); that this Plaintiff's S ection 1983 claims against Defendants Thomas, Barry, and Edwards are dismissed with prejudice prior to service of process pursuant to the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B)(i). Signed by Honorable Judge Truman M. Hobbs on 6/4/2012. (Attachments: # 1 Civil Appeals Checklist)(cc, )

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF ALABAMA
NORTHERN DIVISION
DONNELL FLOURNOY, #126 385,
Plaintiff,
v.
OFFICER I. HARRIS, et al.,
Defendants.

)
)
)
)
) CIVIL ACTION NO.: 2:12-CV-286-TMH
)
)
)
)

ORDER
The Magistrate Judge entered a Recommendation (Doc. #11) in this case to which no
timely objections have been filed. After a review of the Recommendation, and after an
independent review of the entire record, the court finds that the Recommendation should be
adopted. Accordingly, it is
ORDERED that
1. The Recommendation (Doc. #11) of the Magistrate Judge is ADOPTED;
2. Plaintiff’s complaint seeking enforcement of prior injunctive orders of the court
is DISMISSED with prejudice prior to service of process pursuant to the provisions of 28
U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B)(ii);
3. Plaintiff’s Section 1983 claims against Defendants Thomas, Barry, and Edwards
are dismissed with prejudice prior to service of process pursuant to the provisions of 28
U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B)(i); and

3. This case with respect to the remaining defendant is referred back to the Magistrate
Judge for further proceedings.
Done this 4th day of June, 2012.

/s/ Truman M. Hobbs
SENIOR UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

2