Head v. Baisden et al

Filing 19

MEMORANDUM OPINION AND PARTIAL DISMISSAL ORDER-re: 13 Report and Recommendation. The court hereby ADOPTS the Report of the Magistrate Judge and ACCEPTS the recommendation. It is ORDERED that the Motion to Dismiss of the City of Tuscaloosa 7 i s GRANTED as set out. The Motion to Dismiss of Cary Baisden 5 is GRANTED in part and DENIED in part as set out. The Motion to Dismiss of Stephen D. Anderson 5 is GRANTED as set out. Pltf SHALL have twenty-one (21)days to file an amended complaint. Signed by Judge R David Proctor on 3/9/2016. (AVC)

FILED
2016 Mar-09 AM 09:33
U.S. DISTRICT COURT
N.D. OF ALABAMA

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ALABAMA
WESTERN DIVISION
ANTONIO HEAD,
Plaintiff,
v.
CARY BAISDEN, et al.,
Defendants.

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

Case No. 7:14-cv-01788-HGD

MEMORANDUM OPINION AND PARTIAL DISMISSAL ORDER
On August 24, 2015, the Magistrate Judge’s Report and Recommendation was
entered and the parties were allowed therein fourteen (14) days in which to file
objections to the recommendations made by the Magistrate Judge. No objections to
the Magistrate Judge’s Report and Recommendation have been filed by Plaintiff or
Defendants.
After careful consideration of the record in this case and the Magistrate Judge’s
Report and Recommendation, the court hereby ADOPTS the Report of the Magistrate
Judge. The court further ACCEPTS the recommendations of the Magistrate Judge.
It is, therefore, ORDERED, ADJUDGED and DECREED that:

Page 1 of 4

(1) the Motion to Dismiss of the City of Tuscaloosa is GRANTED as to
Counts One, Two and Four and the claims asserted in these counts are DISMISSED
WITHOUT PREJUDICE to Plaintiff’s right to file an amended complaint
correcting the deficiencies noted in the Report and Recommendation;
(2) the Motion to Dismiss of the City of Tuscaloosa is GRANTED as to the
claims asserted in Counts Three, Five and Six and such claims are DISMISSED
WITH PREJUDICE;
(3) the Motion to Dismiss of the City of Tuscaloosa is GRANTED as to the
claim asserted in Count Seven, to the extent that such a claim is construed as being
made pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983, and such claim is DISMISSED WITHOUT
PREJUDICE to Plaintiff’s right to file an amended complaint correcting the
deficiencies noted in the Report and Recommendation;
(4) the Motion to Dismiss of the City of Tuscaloosa is GRANTED as to the
claim asserted in Count Seven, to the extent that such a claim is construed as being
made pursuant to state law, and such claim is DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE;
(5) the Motion to Dismiss of the City of Tuscaloosa is GRANTED as to all
claims for punitive damages and such claims are DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE;

Page 2 of 4

(6) the Motion to Dismiss of Cary Baisden is GRANTED as to any claims
against him in his official capacity and such claims are DISMISSED WITH
PREJUDICE;
(7) the Motion to Dismiss of Cary Baisden is DENIED as to the claims
asserted in Counts One, Two, Three, Four, Five and Six;
(8) the Motion to Dismiss of Stephen D. Anderson is GRANTED as to any
claims against him in his official capacity and such claims are DISMISSED WITH
PREJUDICE;
(9) the Motion to Dismiss of Stephen D. Anderson is GRANTED as to the
claims asserted in Counts One and Six and such claims are DISMISSED WITH
PREJUDICE;
(10) the Motion to Dismiss of Stephen D. Anderson is GRANTED as to the
claim asserted in Count Seven, to the extent that such a claim is construed as being
made pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983, and such claim is DISMISSED WITHOUT
PREJUDICE to Plaintiff’s right to file an amended complaint correcting the
deficiencies noted in the Report and Recommendation;
(11) the Motion to Dismiss of Stephen D. Anderson is GRANTED as to the
claim asserted in Count Seven, to the extent that such a claim is construed as being

Page 3 of 4

made pursuant to state law, and such claim is DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE;
and
(12) the Motion to Dismiss of Stephen D. Anderson is GRANTED as to the
claims asserted in Counts Two, Three, Four and Five and such claims are
DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE to Plaintiff’s right to file an amended
complaint correcting the deficiencies noted in the Report and Recommendation.
Plaintiff SHALL have twenty-one (21) days from the date of entry of this
Memorandum Opinion and Partial Dismissal Order to file an amended complaint.
DONE and ORDERED this

9th

day of March, 2016.

___________________________________
R. DAVID PROCTOR
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Page 4 of 4