Turner v. Welkal et al
| Author Ray Turner |
| Dan Welkal, K. Cox, Granvisse Earl-Young, Pam Hale, Sylvia Gray, f/n/u Lehman, f/n/u Bone, f/n/u Crawly, f/n/u Thomas, J. Craft, Byron Grizzle, Lynn Norris, ABL Food Service, V. Dulin, f/n/u Wood, Tony M. Wilkes and J. Stagg |
| 3:2012cv00915 |
| September 6, 2012 |
| US District Court for the Middle District of Tennessee |
| Nashville Office |
| Davidson |
| John S. Bryant |
| Aleta A. Trauger |
| Civil Rights |
| 42 U.S.C. ยง 1983 |
| Plaintiff |
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
243
ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS: For these reasons, 1. The plaintiff's Objections (Docket No. 237 ) are OVERRULED. 2. The court ACCEPTS AND ADOPTS the Report and Recommendation (Docket No. 233 ). 3. The Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings (Docket No. 196 ) is GRANTED. 4. The prior order (Docket No. 6 ) granting in forma pauperis status is VACATED. 5. This matter is returned to the Magistrate Judge to set a reasonable period within which Turner shall be required to pay t he filing fee as a condition for his continued prosecution of this action. IT IS SO ORDERED. Signed by District Judge Aleta A. Trauger on 5/20/2016. (xc:Pro se party by regular and certified mail.)(DOCKET TEXT SUMMARY ONLY-ATTORNEYS MUST OPEN THE PDF AND READ THE ORDER.)(hb)
|
|
Filing
233
REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION: For the reasons stated above, the undersigned recommends (1) that Defendants' motion for judgment on the pleadings be granted, (2) that the prior order (Docket Entry No. 6 ) granting Plaintiff leave to proceed in for ma pauperis be vacated, and (3) that Plaintiff Turner be given a reasonable period within which to pay the required filing fee as a condition for his continued prosecution of this action. Signed by Magistrate Judge John S. Bryant on 4/5/2016. (xc:Pro se party by regular and certified mail.)(DOCKET TEXT SUMMARY ONLY-ATTORNEYS MUST OPEN THE PDF AND READ THE ORDER.)(hb)
|
|
Filing
137
ORDER: (1) The plaintiff's motion to amend his complaint (ECF No. 122) is GRANTED insofar as the court construes the proposed amendment to state a claim under the Eighth Amendment against the ABL Defendants and to state a claim under the Eigh th Amendment and under state law against defendants Dan Weikal and Pam Hale, in their individual and official capacities, based on allegations of deliberate indifference to the plaintiff's claim of a severe food allergy in light of his right to adequate nutrition. However, in all other respects, the proposed amendment fails to state a claim for which relief may be granted, and all other putative claims in the proposed amendment are DISMISSED. (2) The plaintiff's objections (ECF No. 107) to the R&R (ECF No. 96) recommending that the ABL Defendants' motion to dismiss be granted, are OVERRULED. The ABL Defendants' motion to dismiss (ECF No. 48), construed as a motion for partial dismissal, is GRANTED, and all cla ims against the ABL Defendants except those in the amendment as identified above are DISMISSED. (3) The plaintiff's objections (ECF No. 95 and 126) to both R&Rs (ECF Nos. 87, 115) addressing the DCSO Defendants' motion to dismiss are OV ERRULED. The DCSO Defendants' objections (ECF No. 121) to the most recent R&R (ECF No. 115), addressing their motion to dismiss, are GRANTED IN PART insofar as the court finds that the complaint fails to state a claim against defendant Byro n Grizzle. In all other respects, the DCSO Defendants objections are OVERRULED. The R&R (ECF No. 115) is ACCEPTED, except insofar as it recommends denying the motion to dismiss the claim against defendant Byron Grizzle. Consequently, the DCSO Def endants' motion to dismiss (ECF No.44), also construed as a motion for partial dismissal in light of the plaintiff's amendment to his complaint, is GRANTED IN PART AND DENIED IN PART. All RLUIPA and religious-diet-related First-Amendment claims are DISMISSED. The claims in the original complaint against defendants K. Cox, G. Thomas, and Sylvia Gray are DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE for failure to effect service upon these defendants. The claims against supervisory officials Granvis se Earl-Young, Henry Lehman, Byron Grizzle, Lynn Norris, and Tony M. Wilkes are DISMISSED for failure to state a claim for which relief may be granted. The motion to dismiss the claims in the original complaint against defendants Dan Weikal and P am Hale is GRANTED IN PART, but, as set forth above, the amended complaint is construed to state colorable claims against defendants Weikal and Hale, which remain pending. The motion to dismiss based on qualified immunity asserted by the remaining defendants (Joshua Bone, Clarence Crawley, Jonathan Craft, and Joshua Stagg) is DENIED without prejudice, which leaves various § 1983 claims pending against these defendants. (See R&R, ECF No. 87, at 1617.) Signed by District Judge Aleta A. Trauger on 1/31/2014. (xc:Pro se party by regular and certified mail.)(DOCKET TEXT SUMMARY ONLY-ATTORNEYS MUST OPEN THE PDF AND READ THE ORDER.)(hb)
|
|
Filing
115
REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION: For these reasons, the undersigned believes his prior Report and Recommendation to be properly responsive to the arguments of the DCSO defendants based on the exhibits to plaintiff's complaint, and so again recommend s as follows: That the motion to DISMISS filed on behalf of the DCSO Defendants be GRANTED in part with respect to: (See Order); and, DENIED in part with respect to: (See Order). Signed by Magistrate Judge John S. Bryant on 8/30/13. (xc:Pro se party by regular and certified mail.)(DOCKET TEXT SUMMARY ONLY-ATTORNEYS MUST OPEN THE PDF AND READ THE ORDER.)(tmw)
|
|
Filing
99
ORDER re 96 REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION re 48 MOTION to Dismiss. It is hereby ORDERED that this matter is returned to the Magistrate Judge for a ruling on the Motion to Dismiss that takes into account the arguments of these defendants based upon the exhibits attached to the Complaint. It is so ORDERED. Signed by District Judge Aleta A. Trauger on 7/22/2013. (xc:Pro se party by regular and certified mail.)(DOCKET TEXT SUMMARY ONLY-ATTORNEYS MUST OPEN THE PDF AND READ THE ORDER.)(hb)
|
|
Filing
96
REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION re 48 MOTION to Dismiss. The Magistrate Judge recommends that the ABL Defendants' motion to dismiss be GRANTED, and that the claims against them be DISMISSED. Signed by Magistrate Judge John S. Bryant on 7/16/2013. (xc:Pro se party by regular and certified mail.)(DOCKET TEXT SUMMARY ONLY-ATTORNEYS MUST OPEN THE PDF AND READ THE ORDER.)(hb)
|
|
Filing
87
REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION: Magistrate Judge Bryant recommends that the MOTION to Dismiss filed by the DCSO Defendants 44 be Granted in part and Denied in part. Signed by Magistrate Judge John S. Bryant on 6/27/13. (xc:Pro se party by regular and certified mail.)(DOCKET TEXT SUMMARY ONLY-ATTORNEYS MUST OPEN THE PDF AND READ THE ORDER.)(dt)
|
|
Filing
84
ORDER: The Clerk is directed to TERMINATE as moot motions Nos. 65 , 66 , 67 and 68 . Signed by Magistrate Judge John S. Bryant on 6/7/13. (xc:Pro se party by regular and certified mail.)(DOCKET TEXT SUMMARY ONLY-ATTORNEYS MUST OPEN THE PDF AND READ THE ORDER.)(dt)
|
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 Tennessee 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.
