Burrell v. Alabama Department of Corrections et al
Filing
25
ORDER ADOPTING 19 REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS. Plff's claims against Bonner (Head Classification), Grant Culliver (Regional Coordinator), Robert Davis (Officer), Jefferson S Dunn (Commissioner of the Alabama Department of Corrections), Felto n (Lieutenant), Lloyd Hicks, Matt McGee (Nurse), Lester Murray (Officer), Cheryl Price (Warden), Cedric Specks, Taylor (Sargent), Tew (Captain), Eddie Watts (Officer), Weirich (Officer), Alabama Department of Corrections, and Jeffery Baldwin are DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE. All claims against Mohammad Jenkins, EXCEPT plff's First Amendment claim, be DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE. Plff's First Amendment claim is REFERRED to the magistrate judge for further proceedings. Furt her, any cause of action pursuant to the Board of Adjustment denying plff's claim or based in state law conversion is DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE for failing to state a claim upon which relief can be granted. Signed by Judge Abdul K Kallon on 2/19/2016. Copy served on plff on this date.(YMB)
FILED
2016 Feb-19 AM 08:41
U.S. DISTRICT COURT
N.D. OF ALABAMA
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ALABAMA
SOUTHERN DIVISION
REGINALD BURRELL,
Plaintiff,
v.
ALABAMA DEPARTMENT OF
CORRECTIONS, et al.,
Defendants.
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
Case No.:2:15-cv-00977-AKK-TMP
ORDER
The magistrate judge filed a report on November 23, 2015, recommending
that the plaintiff’s claims against the Alabama Department of Corrections, Grant
Culliver, Cheryl Price, Cedric Sparks, Lloyd Hicks, Jeffery Baldwin, Captain Tew,
Robert Davis, Lester Murray, Matt McGee, Officer Weirich, Eddie Watts,
Classification Officer Bonner, Sargent Taylor, Lieutenant Felton, and Jefferson
Dunn be dismissed without prejudice pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §1915A(b) for failing
to state a claim upon which relief can be granted. Doc. 19. The magistrate judge
further recommended that all claims against Mohammad Jenkins be dismissed
without prejudice pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §1915A(b) for failing to state a claim upon
which relief can be granted, except for the plaintiff’s putative First Amendment
claim, which the magistrate judge recommended be referred to the magistrate
judge for further proceedings. Id. at 27. Finally, the magistrate judge
1
recommended that any cause of action pursuant to the Board of Adjustment
denying the plaintiff’s claim or based in state law conversion be dismissed
pursuant 28 U.S.C. §1915A(b) for failing to state a claim upon which relief can be
granted. Although the magistrate judge advised the plaintiff of his right to file
specific written objections within fourteen (14) days, 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 magistrate judge’s report
is hereby ADOPTED and the recommendation is ACCEPTED. The court
ORDERS that the plaintiff’s claims against the Alabama Department of
Corrections, Grant Culliver, Cheryl Price, Cedric Sparks, Lloyd Hicks, Jeffery
Baldwin, Captain Tew, Robert Davis, Lester Murray, Matt McGee, Officer
Weirich, Eddie Watts, Classification Officer Bonner, Sargent Taylor, Lieutenant
Felton, and Jefferson Dunn are DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE pursuant
to 28 U.S.C. §1915A(b). The court further ORDERS that all claims against
Mohammad Jenkins, EXCEPT for the plaintiff’s First Amendment claim, be
DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §1915A(b). The
court further ORDERS that the plaintiff’s First Amendment claim is REFERRED
to the magistrate judge for further proceedings. Additionally, the court ORDERS
that any cause of action pursuant to the Board of Adjustment denying the
2
plaintiff’s claim or based in state law conversion is DISMISSED WITHOUT
PREJUDICE pursuant 28 U.S.C. §1915A(b) for failing to state a claim upon
which relief can be granted.
DONE the 19th day of February, 2016.
_________________________________
ABDUL K. KALLON
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
3
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?