Jackson v. State of Alabama Department of Corrections et al (MAG+)

Filing 22

ORDERED and ADJUDGED that the 16 Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge is adopted and that pursuant to 28 USC § 1915(e)(2)(B): 1) Plf's § 1983 claims against dft Alabama Department of Corrections are dismissed. Because this dft is s till a party to at least one other claim, it is not terminated; 2) Plf's Title VII claims against dfts Thomas and Forniss are dismissed. Because these two dfts are still parties to other claims, they are not terminated; 3) Plf's § 1983 First Amendment claim included within Count Three is dismissed without prejudice as redundant to that in Count Two; 4) This action is referred back to the magistrate judge for further proceedings on plf's remaining claims. Signed by Honorable Judge Myron H. Thompson on 4/1/2014. (Attachments: # 1 Civil Appeals Checklist) (wcl, )

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

SABRINA C. JACKSON,

)
)
Plaintiff,
)
)
v.
)
)
STATE OF ALABAMA DEPARTMENT )
OF CORRECTIONS, et al.,
)
)
Defendants.
)

CIVIL ACTION NO. 2:14cv18-MHT
(WO)

ORDER
On February 19, 2014, the magistrate judge filed a recommendation in this case to
which no timely objections have been filed. Upon an independent and de novo 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 (Doc.
# 16) is adopted and that pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B):
1.

Plaintiff’s § 1983 claims against defendant Alabama Department of Corrections

are dismissed. Because this defendant is still a party to at least one other claim, it is not
terminated.
2.
dismissed.
terminated.

Plaintiff’s Title VII claims against defendants Thomas and Forniss are
Because these two defendants are still parties to other claims, they are not

3.

Plaintiff’s § 1983 First Amendment claim included within Count Three is

dismissed without prejudice as redundant to that in Count Two.
4.

This action is referred back to the magistrate judge for further proceedings on

plaintiff’s remaining claims.
Done this the 1st day of April, 2014.

/s/ Myron H. Thompson
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE