Callwood v. Jones et al
Filing
146
JUDGMENT, in accordance with the Memorandum Opinion and Order entered on this date, and Orders previously entered in this case (Doc. 36 , ]123]), Final Judgment is entered as to Defendants David Butler, Phenix City, Shawn Sheely, Raymond J. Smith, J oey Williams, Charles W. Jenkins Jr., Jay Jones, Steven M. Mills, and Ray Smith, and against the Plaintiff on the Plaintiff's federal claims; Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 1367(c), the court declines to exercise supplemental jurisdiction over the Plain tiff's state law claims. Signed by Honorable Judge W. Harold Albritton, III on 11/10/16. (Attachments: # 1 civil appeals checklist). Furnished to calendar group & JT (terminates Pretrial Conference 02/02/2017; Jury Trial 03/06/2017).(djy, )
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF ALABAMA
NORTHERN DIVISION
GLADIS CALLWOOD, as Administratrix
of the Estate of KHARI NEVILLE
ILLIDGE,
Plaintiff,
v.
PHENIX CITY, ALABAMA, a municipal
corporation; JAY JONES, individually;
CHARLES W. JENKINS, JR,
individually; STEVEN M. MILLS,
individually; RAY SMITH, individually;
JOEY WILLIAMS, individually; DAVID
BUTLER, individually; SHAWN
SHEELY, individually; and RAYMOND
J. SMITH, individually,
Defendants.
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
Civil Action No. 2:15CV182-WHA
(wo)
JUDGMENT
In accordance with the Memorandum Opinion and Order entered on this date, and Orders
previously entered in this case (Doc. ##36, 123), Final Judgment is entered as to Defendants
David Butler, Phenix City, Shawn Sheely, Raymond J. Smith, Joey Williams, Charles W.
Jenkins Jr., Jay Jones, Steven M. Mills, and Ray Smith, and against the Plaintiff on the Plaintiff’s
federal claims.
Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §1367(c), the court declines to exercise supplemental jurisdiction
over the Plaintiff’s state law claims.
Done this 10th day of November, 2016.
/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?