Scott v. Alabama Department of Corrections
||Joe Henry Scott, III
||Alabama Department of Corrections
||September 9, 2009
||US District Court for the Southern District of Alabama
||William E. Cassady
||William H. Steele
|Nature of Suit:
|Cause of Action:
||42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
|Jury Demanded By:
Access additional case information on PACER
Available Case Documents
The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:
|February 3, 2010
ORDER ADOPTING the 13 REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS. It is ORDERED that plaintiff's existing claims are DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE and his motions to amend (Docs. 9 & 10) are DENIED. It is further ORDERED that plaintiff's motion for a prel iminary injunction (Doc.11) is DENIED. Plaintiff may file a new complaint that names or properly identifies those suable entities that he claims are responsible for the injuries suffered if said complaint is filed within 60 days of the entry of this Order. Signed by Judge William H. Steele on 2/3/10. Copy mailed to Plaintiff. (tgw)
|January 6, 2010
REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS: It is recommended that plaintiff's pending claims be dismissed without prejudice and that his motions to amend (Docs. 9 & 10) be denied because they are futile. It is further recommended that an extension of time of 60 days be granted from the adoption of this recommendation for plaintiff to file a new complaint (as set out). It is recommended that the Motion for Preliminary Injunction (Doc. 11) be denied. Objections to R&R due by 1/26/2010. Signed by Magistrate Judge William E. Cassady on 1/6/10. Copy mailed to Plaintiff. (tgw)
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 Southern 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?