Abro v. Alabama Department of Corrections, et al (INMATE 2)
ORDER as follows: 1. Plaintiff's 34 Objection is OVERRULED. 2. The court ADOPTS the 31 Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge. 3. Defendants' Motions for Summary Judgment (Docs. 21 and 30 ) are GRANTED. 4. This case is DISMISSED with prejudice, with costs taxed against the Plaintiff. Signed by Honorable Judge W. Harold Albritton, III on 9/24/2015. (dmn, )
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FORTHE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF ALABAMA
DEMETRIUS LAWANA ABRO, #172755,
FRANK ALBRIGHT, et al.,
CASE NO. 2:12-cv-583-WHA
This case is before the court on the Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge (Doc. #31),
entered on July 23, 2015, and the Plaintiff’s Objection (Doc. #34). After conducting an
independent evaluation and de novo review of this case, the court finds the Plaintiff’s objection
to be without merit.
In her objection, the Plaintiff makes reference to various immunities to which she claims
Defendants are not entitled. The Recommendation, however, was based on the merits of the
case, and not on the basis of any immunity defense, including qualified immunity. Otherwise,
the objection essentially re-argues the challenges made by the Plaintiff in her Complaint, for
which she contends she met her burden of demonstrating that disputed issues of material fact
exist and which make summary judgment improper. The court, however, agrees with the
Magistrate Judge’s analysis and findings to the contrary, and the Recommendation that the
Defendants’ Motions for Summary Judgment be granted. Therefore, it is hereby ORDERED as
1. Plaintiff’s Objection is OVERRULED.
2. The court ADOPTS the Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge.
3. Defendants’ Motions for Summary Judgment (Docs. #21 and #30) are GRANTED.
4. This case is DISMISSED with prejudice, with costs taxed against the Plaintiff.
DONE this 24th day of September, 2015.
/s/ W. Harold Albritton
W. HAROLD ALBRITTON
SENIOR UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
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?