Wade v. Ballard, No. 2:2013cv12817 - Document 13 (S.D.W. Va. 2014)
Court Description: MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER adopting the 12 PROPOSED FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATION; denying plaintiff's 11 LETTER-FORM MOTION for Temporary Restraining Order; directing that this action is referred anew to the assigned magistrate judge under the same conditions and authority set forth in the standing order entered 7/7/2013. Signed by Judge John T. Copenhaver, Jr. on 3/21/2000. (cc: attys; pro se plaintiff; United States Magistrate Judge) (tmh)
Download PDF
<![CDATA[
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF WEST VIRGINIA AT CHARLESTON MATTHEW STUART WADE, Plaintiff, v. Civil Action No. 2:13-012817 DAVID BALLARD, Warden, Mount Olive Correctional Complex, Defendant. MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER This action was previously referred to Dwane L. Tinsley, United States Magistrate Judge, who has submitted his Proposed Findings and Recommendation pursuant to the provisions of 28 U.S.C. ยง 636(b)(1)(B). The court has reviewed the Proposed Findings and Recommendation entered by the magistrate judge on February 28, 2014. The magistrate judge recommends that the court deny the plaintiff s motion for a temporary restraining order/preliminary injunction. The plaintiff has not objected to the Proposed Findings and Recommendation. The court concludes the recommended disposition is correct. Accordingly, it is ORDERED that: 1. The Proposed Findings and Recommendation be, and it hereby is, adopted by the court; 2. The plaintiff s motion for a temporary restraining order/preliminary injunction be, and hereby is, denied; and 3. This action is referred anew to the assigned magistrate judge under the same conditions and authority set forth in the standing order entered June 7, 2013. The Clerk is directed to forward copies of this written opinion and order to the pro se plaintiff, all counsel of record, and the United States Magistrate Judge. DATED: March 21, 2014 John T. Copenhaver, Jr. United States District Judge 2
]]>
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You
should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google
Privacy Policy and
Terms of Service apply.
