Reed v. Corizon Health

Filing 16

MEMORANDUM OPINION. Signed by Judge R David Proctor on 5/12/2017. (KAM, )

Download PDF
FILED 2017 May-12 AM 11:55 U.S. DISTRICT COURT N.D. OF ALABAMA UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ALABAMA SOUTHERN DIVISION MARSHALL VAN REED, Plaintiff, v. CORIZON HEALTH, et al., Defendants. } } } } } } } } } Case No.: 2:15-cv-00793-RDP-JHE MEMORANDUM OPINION On April 26, 2017, the Magistrate Judge’s Report and Recommendation was entered and the parties were allowed therein fourteen (14) days in which to file objections to the recommendations made by the Magistrate Judge. No objections were filed. After careful consideration of the record in this case and the Magistrate Judge’s Report and Recommendation, the court hereby ADOPTS the Report of the Magistrate Judge. The court further ACCEPTS the recommendations of the Magistrate Judge that all claims against Dr. Roddam; the Eighth Amendment medical care claims against Defendant Hood which arose between November 2013 and October 8, 2014; the Eighth Amendment medical care claims against Defendants Butler and Corizon; and the Fourteenth Amendment equal protection claims against Defendants Corizon and Hood are due to be dismissed. Plaintiff’s Eighth Amendment medical care claims against Defendant Hood based on conduct occurring after October 2014, and his state law medical negligence claims against Defendants Hood, Butler, and Corizon are referred to the magistrate judge for further proceedings. A separate order in accordance with the Memorandum Opinion will be entered. DONE and ORDERED this May 12, 2017. _________________________________ R. DAVID PROCTOR UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 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?