Thigpen v. Hill et al

Filing 30

MEMORANDUM OF OPINION Signed by Judge William M Acker, Jr on 5/9/16. (SAC )

Download PDF
FILED 2016 May-09 AM 11:13 U.S. DISTRICT COURT N.D. OF ALABAMA IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ALABAMA SOUTHERN DIVISION WILLIE THIGPEN, Plaintiff v. CHRISTIAN HILL, et al., Defendants ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) Case No. 2:14-cv-00426-WMA-HGD MEMORANDUM OF OPINION The magistrate judge filed a report and recommendation on March 21, 2016, recommending that defendant Hart’s motion for summary judgment (doc. 24) be granted and that the plaintiff’s claims against defendant Hart be dismissed with prejudice. The magistrate judge further recommended that the plaintiff’s claims against defendant Hill be dismissed without prejudice for want of prosecution. The parties were allowed fourteen (14) days to file objections and advised that the failure to file such objections would bar any later challenge or review of the factual findings of the magistrate judge. No objections have been received by the court. Having carefully reviewed and considered de novo all the materials in the court file, including the report and recommendation, the court is of the opinion that the Page 1 of 2 magistrate judge’s report is due to be and is hereby is ADOPTED and the recommendation is ACCEPTED. The court EXPRESSLY finds that there are no genuine issues of material fact and defendant Hart is entitled to judgment as a matter of law on the plaintiff’s claims. Accordingly, defendant Hart’s motion for summary judgment is due to be GRANTED and the plaintiff’s claims against him are due to be DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE. The plaintiff’s claims against defendant Hill will be DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE. A Final Judgment will be entered. DATED this 9th day of May, 2016. _____________________________ WILLIAM M. ACKER, JR. UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE Page 2 of 2

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?