Brown v. Thomas et al (INMATE 1)
Available Case Documents
The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:
|Date Filed||#||Document Text|
|March 2, 2017
ORDER: On 1/31/2017, the Magistrate Judge entered a 44 Recommendation that the Defendants motions for summary judgment be granted and the case dismissed. The Plaintiff was given until 2/14/2017 to file objections. No timely objection was filed, and on 2/22/2017, the court adopted the Recommendation, granted the motions for summary judgment, dismissed the case with prejudice, and entered final judgment. (Doc. 45 and 46 ). Now, on 3/1/2017, the Plaintiff has filed a document styled 47 Objec tion by Writ of Mandamus. The objection is untimely. Furthermore, after de novo review of the objection and the file in this case, the court finds the Objection, or Motion for Writ of Mandamus, to be without merit, and it is ORDERED as follows: 1. The 47 Objection is OVERRULED. 2. The Motion for Writ of Mandamus is DENIED. 3. The 45 Order and 46 Final Judgment remain in full force and effect. Signed by Honorable Judge W. Harold Albritton, III on 3/2/2017. (dmn, )
|February 22, 2017
ORDER ADOPTING 44 REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION of the Magistrate Judge as follows: (1) the defs' Motions for Summary Judgment are GRANTED; (2) judgment is GRANTED in favor of the defs; (3) this case is DISMISSED with prejudice; (4) costs are taxed against the plf; (5) final judgment will be entered in accordance with this order. Signed by Honorable Judge W. Harold Albritton, III on 2/22/17. (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
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?