Henley v. Byers et al

Filing 37

ORDER GRANTING IN PART and DENYING IN PART 20 33 MOTIONS for Summary Judgment as set out herein. The Court is of the Opinion the Magistrate Judge's 36 Report is due to be and is hereby ADOPTED and the Magistrate Judge's 36 Recom mendation is ACCEPTED. Remaining in this case are the individual capacity claims for failure to protect asserted against Defendants Byers, MacMillan, and Bailey. Defendants Byers, MacMillan, and Bailey are ORDERED to file an answer to Plaintiffs claims within twenty (20) days of the entry date of this Order. Signed by Judge James H Hancock on 8/18/2014. (JLC)

FILED
2014 Aug-18 AM 10:10
U.S. DISTRICT COURT
N.D. OF ALABAMA

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ALABAMA
NORTHEASTERN DIVISION
COREY HENLEY,
Plaintiff,
v.
BYERS, et. al.,
Defendants.

)
)
)
)
) 5:11-cv-03922-JHH-SGC
)
)
)
)
ORDER

By a report and recommendation entered on July 11, 2014, the magistrate judge
recommended as follows:
1.

The motion for summary judgment (Doc. 20) as to Defendant Gray is
due to be GRANTED, and the claims against Defendant Gray are due
to be DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE;

2.

The Alabama Department of Corrections is due to be DISMISSED as
a defendant;

3.

The motions for summary judgment (Docs. 20 and 33) as to
Plaintiff’s claims against Defendants Byers, MacMillan, and
Bailey in their official capacities for monetary relief are due to
be GRANTED, and such claims are due to be DISMISSED
WITH PREJUDICE;

4.

The motions for summary judgment (Docs. 20 and 33) as to
Plaintiff’s Eighth Amendment failure-to-protect claims against
Defendants Byers, MacMillan, and Bailey in their individual
capacities are due to be DENIED, as is their attempt to invoke
qualified immunity;

5.

To the extent Plaintiff was attempting to raise a claim of
deliberate indifference to serious medical needs, such claim is
DISMISSED.

(Doc. 36 at 17-18). The parties were allowed fourteen (14) days to file written
objections to the magistrate judge’s report and recommendation. (Id.). No objections
have been filed.
Having carefully reviewed and considered de novo all the materials in the court
file, the court is of the opinion the magistrate judge’s report is due to be and is hereby
ADOPTED and the magistrate judge’s recommendation is ACCEPTED. Regarding
all claims, issues, and parties as to which the magistrate judge recommended granting
summary judgment, the court EXPRESSLY FINDS there are no genuine issues of
material fact, and judgment is appropriate as a matter of law.
The motions for summary judgment are GRANTED as to Plaintiff’s claims
against Defendant Gray and the Alabama Department of Corrections, and such claims
and defendants are DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE. Plaintiff’s claims against
Defendants Byers, MacMillan, and Bailey in their official capacities for monetary
relief are GRANTED, and such claims are DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE. The
motions for summary judgment as to Plaintiff’s Eighth Amendment failure-to-protect
claims against Defendants Byers, MacMillan, and Baily in their individual capacities
are DENIED. To the extent Plaintiff was attempting to raise a claim of deliberate
indifference to serious medical needs, such claim is DISMISSED.

Remaining in this case are the individual capacity claims for failure to protect
asserted against Defendants Byers, MacMillan, and Bailey. Defendants Byers,
MacMillan, and Bailey are ORDERED to file an answer to Plaintiff’s claims within
twenty (20) days of the entry date of this order.
DONE this 18th day of August, 2014.

SENIOR UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE