Berry v. Reed (INMATE 2)

Plaintiff: Cordaryl Cornelius Berry
Defendant: Keith Reed
Case Number: 1:2014cv01110
Filed: October 24, 2014
Court: Alabama Middle District Court
Office: Dothan Office
County: Houston
Referring Judge: Terry F. Moorer
Presiding Judge: William Keith Watkins
Nature of Suit: Prison Condition
Cause of Action: 42:1983
Jury Demanded By: None

Available Case Documents

The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:

Date Filed#Document Text
April 20, 2015 14 Opinion or Order of the Court ORDER 5 Report and Recommendation and 13 supplemental Report and Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge; Mr. Berry's claims for defamation and slander in Amended Complaint are DISMISSED with prejudice pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 1915(e)(2)(B)(i), and that the Complaint and amendments thereto are DISMISSED prior to service of process. Signed by Chief Judge William Keith Watkins on 4/20/15. (djy, )

Access additional case information on PACER

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 this case: Berry v. Reed (INMATE 2)
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Plaintiff: Cordaryl Cornelius Berry
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Finance [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web [ Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Defendant: Keith Reed
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Finance [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web [ Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]

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?