Coleman v. Jackson et al (INMATE 1)
ORDER: it is ORDERED that the Motion for a Temporary Restraining Order (Doc. 17 ) is DENIED. It is further ORDERED that this case is referred to the Magistrate Judge for further proceedings. Signed by Honorable Judge R. Austin Huffaker, Jr on 10/4/2021. (cwl, )
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
MIDDLE DISTRICT OF ALABAMA
JOHN STEPHEN COLEMAN, SR.,
TRACY JACKSON, et al.,
Case No. 2:21-cv-548-RAH
On August 17, 2021, Plaintiff John Stephen Coleman, a pretrial detainee confined
in the Elmore County Jail, filed this 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action against Defendants Tracy
Jackson and Captain Tuck. (Doc. 1.) Specifically, the Plaintiff challenges the conditions
of confinement within the jail.
On October 4, 2021, the Plaintiff filed a motion for
temporary restraining order (Doc. 17), in which he asserts that the jail administrators have
retaliated against him for filing this lawsuit by delaying his plea hearing in the Circuit Court
of Elmore County and by moving him to different pods. (Doc. 17.) He states that he feels
he is not safe and will suffer additional harm. He also requests “this Court take notice of
[his] current good health [and] well being in case something detrimental may happen in the
near future.” (Id.)
A temporary restraining order should issue only where the moving party
demonstrates (1) that there is a substantial likelihood of success on the merits, (2) that the
temporary restraining order is necessary to prevent irreparable injury, (3) that the
threatened injury outweighs the harm the temporary restraining order would cause to the
nonmoving party, and (4) that the temporary restraining order would not be adverse to the
public interest. Parker v. State Bd. of Pardons & Paroles, 275 F.3d 1032, 1034–35 (11th
Furthermore, under Rule 65 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, a temporary
restraining order may issue without notice to the nonmoving party only if (a) specific facts
in an affidavit or verified complaint show that the moving party will suffer immediate and
irreparable injury before the adverse party can be heard, and (b) the moving party certifies
in writing the efforts he has made to notify the nonmoving party and the reasons notice
should not be required. Fed. R. Civ. P. 65(b)(1).
Plaintiff has not met Rule 65(b)(1)'s requirements. Although he has sworn to the
facts alleged in his complaint, he does not allege any concrete facts to support a finding
that a temporary restraining order is necessary to prevent immediate and irreparable injury
before Defendants can be heard in opposition. Second, Plaintiff has not submitted the
certification required by Rule 65(b)(1)(B). Because the motion fails scrutiny under Rule
65(b)(1), it is not necessary to analyze the Parker elements.
Accordingly, it is
ORDERED that the Motion for a Temporary Restraining Order (Doc. 17) is
DENIED. It is further
ORDERED that this case is referred to the Magistrate Judge for further proceedings.
DONE on this the 4th day of October, 2021.
/s/ R. Austin Huffaker, Jr.
R. AUSTIN HUFFAKER, JR.
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?