Doss v. Northcutt et al

Filing 93

MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER. The magistrate judge's 87 Report and Recommendation is ADOPTED and ACCEPTED. Accordingly, dfts' 69 and 71 MOTIONS for Summary Judgment are DENIED. Final Pretrial Conference set for 10/7/2016, at 9:00 AM, Hugo L Black US Courthouse, Birmingham, AL; Jury Trial set for 12/5/2016, at 9:00 AM, US Courthouse, Anniston, AL before Judge Abdul K Kallon. Signed by Judge Abdul K Kallon on 8/25/2016.(YMB)

FILED
2016 Aug-25 AM 09:09
U.S. DISTRICT COURT
N.D. OF ALABAMA

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ALABAMA
MIDDLE DIVISION
SANDREW DOSS,
Plaintiff,

vs.
LT. WILLIAM NORTHCUTT, et al.,
Defendants.

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

Civil Action Number
4:12-cv-2718-AKK

MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
The magistrate judge filed a report and recommendation on March 14, 2016,
recommending that the defendants’ motions for summary judgment, docs. 69; 71,
be denied. 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. Defendants filed objections
on March 28, 2016. Docs. 88; 89.
Having carefully reviewed and considered de novo all the materials in the
court file, including the report and recommendation and the objections thereto, the
court is of the opinion that the magistrate judge’s report is due to be and hereby is
ADOPTED and the recommendation is ACCEPTED. The court EXPRESSLY
finds that there are genuine issues of material fact and that the defendants are not
entitled to judgment in their favor as a matter of law.
1

Accordingly, the defendants’ motions for summary judgment are due to be
and hereby are DENIED because of the existence of genuine issues of material
fact.
This matter is SET for a Pretrial Conference at 10:30 a.m. on October 7,
2016 at the Hugo L. Black Courthouse in Birmingham, Alabama and for a Jury
Trial at 9:00 a.m. on December 5, 2016, at the Federal Courthouse in Anniston,
Alabama. The court directs the parties to the Standard Pretrial Procedures
governing all pretrial deadlines, which is attached as Exhibit A.
DONE the 25th day of August, 2016.

_________________________________
ABDUL K. KALLON
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

2

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ALABAMA
PRE-TRIAL DOCKET
HON. ABDUL K. KALLON, PRESIDING
BIRMINGHAM, ALABAMA
This case is set for a pre-trial hearing pursuant to Rule 16 of the Federal
Rules of Civil Procedure. A conference-type hearing will be held in chambers in
the Hugo Black Federal Courthouse in Birmingham, Alabama at the time
indicated.
The hearing will address all matters provided in Rule 16, including the
limitation of issues requiring trial, rulings on pleading motions, and settlement
possibilities.
Counsel attending the conference are expected to be well-informed about
the factual and legal issues of the case, and to have authority to enter appropriate
stipulations and participate in settlement discussions. Counsel appearing at the
conference will be required to proceed at trial notwithstanding the naming of
others as designated trial counsel.
Promptly upon receipt of this notice, plaintiff's counsel is to initiate
discussions with other counsel aimed at ascertaining which basic facts are not in
dispute, at clarifying the parties' contentions (for example, just what is denied
under a "general denial") and at negotiating workable procedures and deadlines
for remaining discovery matters. At least four (4) business days in advance of the
conference, plaintiff's counsel is to submit to chambers (via email at
[e-mail]) a proposed Pre-trial Order in WordPerfect
format, furnishing other counsel with a copy. It is anticipated that in most cases
the proposed order, with only minor insertions and changes, could be adopted by
the court and signed at the close of the hearing.
A sample of a proposed Pre-trial Order is available on the Chamber web site
(www.alnd.uscourts.gov/Kallon/Kallonpage.htm) to illustrate the format preferred
by the court and also to provide additional guidance and instructions. Each order
must, of course, be tailored to fit the circumstances of the individual case.

Counsel drafting this proposed order should consider the utility this
document will provide for the litigants, the jury, and the court alike. The court
anticipates using the pretrial order to (1) identify and narrow the legal and factual
issues remaining for trial, and (2) provide jurors with the legal and factual context
of the dispute. This order should not revisit at length arguments made in previous
filings with the court, nor should it serve as another venue for adversarial
posturing. Pretrial orders should be simple, short, and informative.
IN ANY CASE WHERE COUNSEL HAVE ANNOUNCED
SETTLEMENT TO THE COURT, A CONSENT JUDGMENT IN
SATISFACTORY FORM MUST BE PRESENTED TO THE COURT PRIOR TO
THE SCHEDULED TRIAL DATE; OTHERWISE, THE CASE WILL BE
DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE.