Pritchett v. Farr et al (INMATE 2)
ORDER that the 39 Recommendation is ADOPTED, and it is hereby ORDERED as follows: 1) Plf's 3/11/2015 pleading, which the court considers to be a Motion to Dismiss Dft Derek Farr (Doc. # 32 ) is GRANTED; 2) Dft Derek Farr is DISMSISED with prej udice as a party to the Complaint; 3) The 34 Motion for Extension of Time is DENIED as moot; 4) This case with respect to the remaining Dft is referred back to the Magistrate Judge for further proceedings. Signed by Honorable Judge W. Harold Albritton, III on 4/20/2015. (Attachments: # 1 Civil Appeals Checklist) (wcl, )
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF ALABAMA
PETER PRITCHETT, JR., #284 708,
POLICE OFFICER DEREK FARR, et al.,
CASE NO. 3:13cv-712-WHA
This case is before the court on the Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge (Doc. #39),
entered on March 23, 2015. There being no timely objection filed to the Recommendation, and
after a review of the file, the Recommendation is ADOPTED, and it is hereby ORDERED as
1. Plaintiff’s March 11, 2015 pleading, which the court considers to be a Motion to
Dismiss Defendant Derek Farr (Doc. #32) is GRANTED.
2. Defendant Derek Farr is DISMSISED with prejudice as a party to the Complaint.
3. The Motion for Extension of Time (Doc. #34) is DENIED as moot.
4. This case with respect to the remaining Defendant is referred back to the Magistrate
Judge for further proceedings.
DONE this 20th_ day of April, 2015.
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?