Ellis v. Holland et al (INMATE1)
ORDERING and ADJUDGING that: (1) the 27 REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION of the Mag Judge is adopted; (2 the plf's 10 MOTION to Dismiss is granted; (3) the plf's claims against defendants Parham and San Nicholas are dismissed with prejudice; ( 4) defendants Parham and San Nicholas are dismissed as parties to this cause of action; (5) this case, with respect to the plf's claims against the remaining defendants is referred back to the magistrate judge for additional proceedings. Signed by Honorable Myron H. Thompson on 9/22/09. (Attachments: # 1 civil appeals checklist)(djy, )
IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF ALABAMA EASTERN DIVISION WILLIAM LANIER ELLIS, SR., #259380, Plaintiff, v. LORETTA HOLLAND, et al., Defendants. ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ORDER On August 26, 2009 (Doc. # 27), the magistrate judge filed a recommendation in this case to which no timely objections have been filed. Upon an independent and de novo review of the file in this case and upon consideration of the recommendation of the magistrate judge, it is ORDERED and ADJUDGED that: (1) (2) (3) prejudice. (4) (5) Defendants Parham and San Nicholas are dismissed as parties to this cause of action. This case, with respect to the plaintiff's claims against the remaining defendants is The recommendation of the magistrate judge (Doc. # 27) is adopted. The plaintiff's motion to dismiss (Doc. # 10) is granted. The plaintiff's claims against defendants Parham and San Nicholas are dismissed with
CIVIL ACTION NO. 3:09cv655-MHT ( W O)
referred back to the magistrate judge for additional proceedings. DONE, this the 22nd day of September, 2009. /s/ Myron H. Thompson
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?