Thomas v. Billups et al (INMATE 2)

Filing 15

(VACATED PURSUANT TO THE COURT'S 16 ORDER) OPINION. Signed by Honorable Judge Myron H. Thompson on 1/4/2017. (wcl, ) Modified on 1/4/2017 (wcl, ).

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES FOR THE
MIDDLE DISTRICT OF ALABAMA, NORTHERN DIVISION
DANIEL K. THOMAS,
Plaintiff,
v.
WARDEN P. BILLUPS and
COMMISSIONER JEFFERSON
DUNN,
Defendants.

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

CIVIL ACTION NO.
2:15cv375-MHT
(WO)

OPINION
Pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983, plaintiff, a state
prisoner, while housed at Kilby Correctional Facility,
filed this lawsuit naming as defendants a warden and
the prison commissioner and challenging the denial of
canteen, visitation, and telephone privileges attendant
to

his

placement

in

disciplinary

segregation;

the

denial of a reduction of time in segregation for good
behavior while in segregation; and the policy requiring
him,

due

to

his

disciplinary-segregation

status,

to

exercise with his arms handcuffed behind his back and
his

legs

shackled

together,

which

he

contends

is

a

safety hazard.
the

This lawsuit is now before the court on

recommendation

Judge

that

of

the

plaintiff’s

United

case

be

States

Magistrate

dismissed

due

to

mootness, in light of plaintiff’s transfer to Limestone
Correctional

Facility.

After

an

independent

and

de

novo review of the record, the court concludes that the
magistrate judge’s recommendation should be adopted in
part.

While plaintiff's claims related to his time at

the correctional facility in this district are moot and
while

plaintiff

does

not

object

to

the

magistrate

judge’s recommendation, the court will not dismiss this
case

in

full

but

rather

will

transfer

it

to

the

Northern District of Alabama for this reason: In his
response to the defendants’ special report, plaintiff
included a "notification" that he had been transferred
to a facility there, and he makes the same or a similar
claim

as

he

made

against

the

facility

in

this

district--that he is being endangered by being required
to exercise while handcuffed and shackled in a room
with a concrete floor.

See Response (doc. no. 13) at
2

5.

The court further notes that, in his response,

plaintiff moved to drop his claims unrelated to the
danger

of

exercising

while

handcuffed

and

shackled.

See id. at 4.
An appropriate judgment will be entered.
DONE, this the 4th day of January, 2017.
/s/ Myron H. Thompson
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE