Tatum v. Marshall et al (INMATE1)
| Jeremy Christopher Tatum |
| D. T. Marshall, Johnny Hardwick, Eleanor I. Brooks, Larry Sasser, Melissa Rittenour and Ms. Wright |
| 2:2008cv00792 |
| September 25, 2008 |
| U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Alabama |
| Habeas Corpus (Prison Condition) Office |
| Montgomery |
| Wallace Capel |
| Truman M. Hobbs |
| None |
| Federal Question |
| 42:1983 Prisoner Civil Rights |
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
18
ORDER ADOPTING 17 REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION. For the reasons stated in the Magistrate Judge's Recommendation, Plaintiff's 42 U.S.C. 1983 claims against Defendants Johnny Hardwick, Melissa Rittenour, Eleanor Brooks, and Larry Sasser are DI SMISSED with prejudice and prior to service of process pursuant to the provisions of 28 U.S.C. 1915(e)(2)(B)(i), (ii) and (iii). Plaintiff's 1983 claims against Defendant Marshall regarding the constitutionality of his confinement are DISMISSED as Defendant Marshall has acted pursuant to the directives of a state court in ensuring Plaintiff's confinement. Plaintiff's challenge to the constitutionality of the conviction and sentence imposed upon him by the Circuit Court of Montgome ry County, Alabama, for assault is DISMISSED without prejudice pursuant to the provisions of 28 U.S.C. 1915(e)(2)(B)(ii) because such claims are not properly before the Court at this time. This case, with respect to Plaintiff's claims challengin g the handling of his personal mail and overcrowded conditions at the Montgomery County Detention Facility lodged against Defendants Marshall and Wright, is REFERRED back to the Magistrate Judge for further proceedings. Signed by Honorable Truman M. Hobbs on 1/28/2009. (dmn)
|
|
Filing
17
REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION re 1 Inmate 1983 Complaint filed by Jeremy Christopher Tatum that: 1. The plaintiff's claims against Johnny Hardwick, Melissa Rittenout, Eleanor Brooks, and Larry Sasser be DISMISSED with prejudice prior to service of process in accordance with the provisions of 28 U.S.C. 1915(e)(2)(B)(i), (ii), and (iii). 2. The plaintiff's claims against defendant Marshall regarding the constitutionality of his confinement based on the indictment and subsequent conviction be summarily dismissed as Marshall acted pursuant to directives of a state court when ensuring such confinement. 3. The plaintiff's challenge to the constitutionality of the conviction and sentence imposed upon him by the Circuit Court of Montgo mery County, Alabama for assault be dismissed without prejudice pursuant to the provisions of 28 U.S.C. 1915(e)(2)(B)(ii) as such claims are not properly before the court at this time. 4. This case, with respect to the plaintiff's claims challen ging the handling of his personal mail and overcrowded conditions at the Montgomery County Detention Facility lodged against defendants Marshall and Wright, be referred back to the undersigned for further appropriate proceedings. Objections to R&R due by 1/19/2009. Signed by Honorable Wallace Capel, Jr on 1/6/2009. (dmn)
|
|
Filing
5
ORDER directing Monthly Payments be made from Inmate's Prison Account until fee is paid in full; granting 2 Affidavit for Leave to Proceed in forma pauperis except to the extent payment is required under this order. Copies mailed to plaintiff and account clerk at the Montgomery County Detention Facility. Signed by Honorable Wallace Capel, Jr. on 10/14/2008. (dmn)
|
Use the links below to access additional information about this case on the U.S. 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.
