Fuqua v. State of Alabama et al (INMATE 1)
| Regina R. Fuqua |
| State of Alabama, Alabama Department of Corrections, Camille Fields, A. Baker, J. Birmingham and W. Hurst |
| 2:2017cv00251 |
| April 24, 2017 |
| US District Court for the Middle District of Alabama |
| Montgomery Office |
| Elmore |
| W. Harold Albritton |
| Wallace Capel |
| Prison Condition |
| 42 U.S.C. ยง 1983 |
| None |
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
30
ORDER directing as follows: (1) the 29 objections are OVERRULED; (2) the 28 Report and Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge is ADOPTED; (3) the defs' Motions for Summary Judgment (Dics, 10 , 16 ) be GRANTED; (4) judgment be GRANTED in favor of the defs; (5) this case be DISMISSED with prejudice. Signed by Honorable Judge R. Austin Huffaker, Jr on 5/18/2020. (djy, )
|
|
Filing
20
ORDERED that: 1. The Magistrate Judge's Recommendation (Doc. # 8 ) is ADOPTED; 2. Plaintiff's claims against the State of Alabama, the Alabama Department of Corrections, and inmate Camille Fields are DISMISSED with prejudice prior to se rvice of process under 28 U.S.C. 1915(e)(2)(B)(i); and 3. This case, with respect to Plaintiff's claims against the other defendants, is REFERRED back to the Magistrate Judge for further proceedings and recommendation as may be appropriate. Signed by Chief Judge William Keith Watkins on 7/26/2017.(kh, )
|
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.
