Eatmon v. Pilgrim Pride Chicken Plant et al(INMATE 2)
| Jamie Eatmon |
| Dr. Doshia, Dr. Diaz, Sharon Hollard, Mrs Baker, Mrs. Lockhart and Pilgrim Pride Chicken Plant |
| 1:2011cv01002 |
| November 23, 2011 |
| US District Court for the Middle District of Alabama |
| Dothan Office |
| Montgomery |
| Charles S. Coody |
| Truman M. Hobbs |
| Civil Rights |
| 42 U.S.C. ยง 1983 |
| Plaintiff |
Follow case documents by RSS
Available Case Documents
The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing
52
OPINION and ORDER adopting 49 Report and Recommendations; granting plaintiff's 48 , 50 and 51 Motions to Dismiss; dismissing this case without prejudice, and that no costs are TAXED. Signed by Honorable Judge Truman M. Hobbs on 7/17/2012. (cc, )
|
|
Filing
42
OPINION and ORDER re 29 Recommendation. It is ORDERED and ADJUDGED as follows that: 1. The Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge be and is hereby ADOPTED; 2. The Plaintiff's complaint against Defendants Pilgrim's Pride Chicken Plant and Mr. John be and is hereby DISMISSED with prejudice prior to service of process in accordance with the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B)(i); 3. Defendants Pilgrims Pride Chicken Plant and Mr. John be and are hereby DISMISSED as parties to the complaint; and 4. This case with respect to the remaining defendants be and is hereby REFERRED BACK to the Magistrate Judge for further proceedings. Signed by Honorable Judge Truman M. Hobbs on 4/17/2012. (dmn, )
|
Use the links below to access additional information about this case on the US Court's PACER system. A subscription to PACER is required.
Access this case on the Alabama Middle District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System
- Search for Party Aliases
- Associated Cases
- Attorneys
- Case File Location
- Case Summary
- Docket Report
- History/Documents
- Parties
- Related Transactions
- Check Status
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.
