Hardy v. Montgomery Clerk et al (INMATE 1)
Filing
5
ORDERED that the Recommendation is ADOPTED. It is further ORDERED that this action is DISMISSED with prejudice prior to serve of process pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B)(i) because Plaintiff failed to file the complaint within the time prescribed by the applicable period of limitations and, alternatively, because the claim for relief fails to assert a constitutional violation. A separate final judgment will be entered. Signed by Chief Judge William Keith Watkins on 9/30/2015. (kh, )
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF ALABAMA
NORTHERN DIVISION
ALFRED DAVID HARDY III,
# 186 078,
Plaintiff,
v.
MONTGOMERY CLERK,
MUNICIPAL COURT
CONSTITUENT SERVICES,
JUSTICE CENTER RESEARCH
& PLANNING, and GOVERNOR
ROBERT BENTLEY,
Defendants.
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
CASE NO. 2:15-CV-597-WKW
[WO]
ORDER
On August 20, 2015, the Magistrate Judge filed a Recommendation to which
no timely objections have been filed. (Doc. # 4.) Upon an independent review of
the file and the Recommendation, it is ORDERED that the Recommendation is
ADOPTED.
It is further ORDERED that this action is DISMISSED with prejudice prior
to serve of process pursuant to 28 U.S.C. ยง 1915(e)(2)(B)(i) because Plaintiff failed
to file the complaint within the time prescribed by the applicable period of
limitations and, alternatively, because the claim for relief fails to assert a
constitutional violation.
A separate final judgment will be entered.
DONE this 30th day of September, 2015.
/s/ W. Keith Watkins
CHIEF UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
2
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?