Davis v. Birmingham City Jail

Filing 8

ORDER 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 in all aspects with the excep tion of the manner in which some of the plaintiff's claims are dismissed. The recommended dismissal of certain claims with prejudice is REJECTED because the claims are due to be dismissed without prejudice. Therefore, the court ORDERS that the p laintiff's request for injunctive and declaratory relief is MOOT. The court FURTHER ORDERS that with the exception of the claims described in numbers 1 through 4 above, all claims against all defendants are DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE pursuant t o 28 U.S.C.1 The court recognizes this list does not mirror the recommendation section of the magistrate judges report. (Doc. 7 at 26-28 ("Section V")). Nonetheless, the list accurately describes the recommendations made in analysis section. (Id. at 8-26 (Section IV)).§ 1915A(b) for failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted. Claims 1 through 4 are REFERRED to the magistrate judge for further proceedings. Signed by Judge L Scott Coogler on 10/25/2017. (PSM)

FILED
2017 Oct-25 PM 01:49
U.S. DISTRICT COURT
N.D. OF ALABAMA

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ALABAMA
SOUTHERN DIVISION
CHRISTOPHER SHAWN DAVIS,

)
)
Plaintiff,
)
)
v.
)
)
CITY OF BIRMINGHAM, BPD, et al., )
)
Defendants.
)

Case No. 2:17-cv-00164-LSC-TMP

ORDER
The magistrate judge entered a report on August 28, 2017, recommending all
claims for injunctive and declaratory relief be dismissed as moot. (Doc. 7 at 26).
The magistrate judge further recommended that all claims against all defendants be
dismissed with prejudice except the plaintiff’s:
1.

Fourteenth Amendment claim against defendant Tammy for deliberate

indifference to his serious medical needs on December 19, 2016;
2.

Fourteenth Amendment claims against defendants Tammy, Cathy,

Stephanie and Nunn, and defendants Harper, Shelby, Dial and Nixon in their
individual capacities for deliberate indifference to his serious medical needs from
December 20, 2016, to January 3, 2017;
3.

Fourteenth Amendment claims against defendants Harper, Shelby,

Dial and Nixon in their individual capacities for unconstitutional conditions of

1

confinement based on their refusal to provide him with a clean uniform, linens,
washcloths and towels from December 20, 2016, to January 3, 2017; and
4.

Fourteenth Amendment claims against defendants Tammy, Cathy,

Stephanie and Nunn for deliberate indifference to his serious post-surgical needs
from January 4 to January 15, 2017.1
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 in all aspects with
the exception of the manner in which some of the plaintiff’s claims are dismissed.
The recommended dismissal of certain claims with prejudice is REJECTED
because the claims are due to be dismissed without prejudice.
Therefore, the court ORDERS that the plaintiff’s request for injunctive and
declaratory relief is MOOT.

The court FURTHER ORDERS that with the

exception of the claims described in numbers 1 through 4 above, all claims against
all defendants are DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE pursuant to 28 U.S.C.

1

The court recognizes this list does not mirror the recommendation section of the magistrate
judge’s report. (Doc. 7 at 26-28 (“Section V”)). Nonetheless, the list accurately describes the
recommendations made in analysis section. (Id. at 8-26 (“Section IV”)).
2

§ 1915A(b) for failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted. Claims 1
through 4 are REFERRED to the magistrate judge for further proceedings.
DONE and ORDERED on October 25, 2017.

_____________________________
L. Scott Coogler
United States District Judge
160704

3