Shack v. Mason et al
ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND ACCEPTING RECOMMENDATION dfts' motion for summary judgment is GRANTED IN PART and DENIED IN PART; dft Mason is ORDERED to file an answer w/i 20 days. Signed by Judge R David Proctor on 2/18/14. (ASL)
2014 Feb-18 PM 04:11
U.S. DISTRICT COURT
N.D. OF ALABAMA
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ALABAMA
JOSEPH L. SHACK,
SGT. JOHN MASON, et. al.,
Case No. 4:12-cv-00602-RDP-TMP
The Magistrate Judge filed a Report and Recommendation on January 21, 2014,
recommending that Defendants' motion for summary judgment be granted as to Plaintiff's
claims against Warden Carter Davenport and Dr. Talley, and that those claims be dismissed
with prejudice. (Doc. 41).
The Magistrate Judge further recommended that Defendants' motion for summary
judgment be denied as to the excessive force claims against Defendant Mason.
The parties were allowed eleven (11) days in which to file written objections to the
Magistrate Judge's recommendations. No objections have been filed by any party.
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 Magistrate
Judge's Report is due to be and is hereby ADOPTED and the Magistrate Judge's
recommendation is ACCEPTED. Defendants' motion for summary judgment is therefore
due to be and the same is hereby GRANTED IN PART and DENIED IN PART.
Defendants' motion for summary judgment is GRANTED as to Plaintiff's claims against
Warden Carter Davenport and Dr. Talley. Accordingly, these claims are DISMISSED
The motion is DENIED as to Plaintiff's Eighth Amendment excessive force claims
against Mason. Defendant Mason is hereby ORDERED to file an answer within twenty
(20) days of the entry date of this order.
DONE and ORDERED this
day of February, 2014.
R. DAVID PROCTOR
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?