Smith v. United States of America et al (INMATE 2)
ORDERED as follows: 1. The Plaintiffs 15 Objection is OVERRULED. 2. The court adopts the 14 Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge. 3. This case is DISMISSED with prejudice prior to service of process under 28 U.S.C. §1915(e)(2)(B)(ii). Signed by Honorable Judge W. Harold Albritton, III on 9/8/2016. (kh, )
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF ALABAMA
ANDREW JACKSON SMITH, #228 252,
BARACK H. OBAMA, President; ROBERT )
BENTLEY, Governor; JEFFERSON S.
DUNN, Commissioner; and CORIZON
Civ. Action No. 2:16cv216-WHA
This case is before the court on the Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge (Doc. #14)
and the Plaintiff’s Objection thereto (Doc. #15). After an independent evaluation and de novo
review of the file, the court finds the Objection to be without merit.
The basis for the Recommendation that this §1983 action be dismissed is that the
Amended Complaint fails to allege any personal involvement or connection between the actions
of the Defendants and the constitutional violations alleged. In his objection the Plaintiff makes
reference to the original complaint regarding a conditions claim and asserts that the Defendants
have authority to do something about it. The original complaint, however, is not before the court.
The Plaintiff makes no specific objections to the findings and conclusions made in the
Recommendation, but claims in a general fashion that the judicial system in Alabama historically
acts with a political pattern of disregard for the law and the lives of inmates in the state.
The court agrees with the Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge, and it is hereby
ORDERED as follows:
1. The Plaintiff’s Objection is OVERRULED.
2. The court adopts the Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge.
3. This case is DISMISSED with prejudice prior to service of process under 28 U.S.C.
Done this 8th day of September, 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?