Watts v. City of Opelika, Alabama et al
Filing
48
ORDERED as follows: (1) All claims against defendant Joshua Combs are dismissed except for plaintiff Calvin Watts's § 1983 Fourth Amendment excessive-force claim (Count I) and his state-law assault-and-battery claim (Count X), which remain pending. (2) Plaintiff Combs's motion for summary judgment (doc. no. 24 ) is denied as moot with respect to the dismissed claims and remains pending with respect to the excessive-force and assault-and-battery claims. (3) The magistrate judge 39;s report and recommendation (doc. no. 43 ) and plaintiff Combs's objections (doc. no. 44 ) are moot as to the dismissed claims and remain pending with respect to the excessive-force and assault-and-battery claims. Signed by Honorable Judge Myron H. Thompson on 11/23/2015. (kh, )
IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES FOR THE
MIDDLE DISTRICT OF ALABAMA, EASTERN DIVISION
CALVIN WATTS,
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
Plaintiff,
v.
JOSHUA COMBS,
Defendant.
CIVIL ACTION NO.
3:13cv742-MHT
(WO)
ORDER
Based on the representations made on the record at
a
pretrial
hearing
on
November
23,
2015,
and
by
agreement of the parties, it is ORDERED as follows:
(1) All claims against defendant Joshua Combs are
dismissed except for plaintiff Calvin Watts’s § 1983
Fourth Amendment excessive-force claim (Count I) and
his
state-law
assault-and-battery
claim
(Count
X),
which remain pending.
(2) Plaintiff Combs’s motion for summary judgment
(doc. no. 24) is denied as moot with respect to the
dismissed claims and remains pending with respect to
the excessive-force and assault-and-battery claims.
(3) The
recommendation
magistrate
(doc.
no.
judge’s
43)
and
report
plaintiff
and
Combs’s
objections (doc. no. 44) are moot as to the dismissed
claims
and
remain
pending
with
respect
to
the
excessive-force and assault-and-battery claims.
DONE, this the 23rd day of November, 2015.
_ /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?