Tullis v. Alabama Pardons and Parole Board (INMATE 1)

Filing 69

ORDERED as follows: 1. The Magistrate Judge's Recommendation (Doc. # 67 ) is ADOPTED; 2. Plaintiff's objections (Doc. # 68 ) are OVERRULED; 3. Defendants' motion for summary judgment (Doc. # 43 ) is GRANTED. A final judgment will be entered separately. Signed by Chief Judge William Keith Watkins on 9/19/2017. (kh, )

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF ALABAMA
NORTHERN DIVISION
LISA McKINLEY TULLIS,
Plaintiff,
v.
CLIFF WALKER, et al.,
Defendants.

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

CASE NO. 2:15-CV-91-WKW
[WO]

ORDER
On July 31, 2017, the Magistrate Judge filed a Recommendation (Doc. # 67)
that Defendants’ motion for summary judgment (Doc. # 43) be granted. Plaintiff
timely objected to the Recommendation. (Doc. # 68.) Upon an independent and de
novo review of the record and Recommendation, Plaintiff’s objections are due to be
overruled, and the Magistrate Judge’s Recommendation is due to be adopted.
Other than correctly noting two typographical errors in the Recommendation
(Doc. # 68, at 1)—neither of which is material to the Recommendation’s outcome—
Plaintiff’s objection mostly rehashes arguments she made in previous filings. The
Recommendation adequately addressed those arguments and properly rejected them.
To the extent Plaintiff objects on grounds not addressed in the Recommendation,
those grounds are without merit and warrant no discussion.

Accordingly, it is ORDERED as follows:
1.

The Magistrate Judge’s Recommendation (Doc. # 67) is ADOPTED;

2.

Plaintiff’s objections (Doc. # 68) are OVERRULED;

3.

Defendants’ motion for summary judgment (Doc. # 43) is GRANTED.

A final judgment will be entered separately.
DONE this 19th day of September, 2017.
/s/ W. Keith Watkins
CHIEF UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

2