McDaniel v. Peterson et al (INMATE 2), No. 1:2014cv01176 - Document 6 (M.D. Ala. 2015)
Court Description: JUDGMENT, in accordance with the memorandum opinion entered this date, it is the ORDER, JUDGMENT, and DECREE of the court as follows: (1) the 4 REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION of the Magistrate Judge is adopted; (2) this lawsuit is dismissed as follows : The 42 U.S.C. 1983 claims presented against defendants Peterson, Blalock, and Clenney are dismissed with prejudice under 28 U.S.C. 915(e)(2)(B)(i); the 42 U.S.C. 1983 claims against defendant Anderson are dismissed without prejudice under 28 U.S .C. 1915(e)(2)(B)(ii); and the challenge to the constitutionality of the pending criminal charges is dismissed without prejudice under 28 U.S.C. 1915(e)(2)(B)(ii) as such challenge is not properly before the court at this time; further ORDERING t hat costs are taxed against plaintiff, for which execution may issue; directing the clerk to enter this document on the civil docket as a final judgment pursuant to Rule 58 FRCP; this case is closed. Signed by Honorable Judge Myron H. Thompson on 2/2/15. (Attachments: # 1 civil appeals checklist)(djy, )
Download PDF
<![CDATA[
McDaniel v. Peterson et al (INMATE 2) Doc. 6 IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF ALABAMA, SOUTHERN DIVISION SHAWN MAXMILLION McDANIEL, Plaintiff, v. HONORABLE JUDGE PETERSON, et al., Defendants. ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CIVIL ACTION NO. 1:14cv1176-MHT (WO) JUDGMENT In accordance with the memorandum opinion entered this date, it is the ORDER, JUDGMENT, and DECREE of the court as follows: (1) The United States Magistrate Judge's recommendation (doc. no. 4) is adopted. (2) This lawsuit is dismissed as follows: The 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Peterson, claims Blalock, presented and Clenney against are defendants dismissed with prejudice under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B)(i); the 42 U.S.C. § 1983 claims against defendant Anderson are Dockets.Justia.com dismissed without § 1915(e)(2)(B)(ii); prejudice under and challenge the 28 U.S.C. to the constitutionality of the pending criminal charges is dismissed without prejudice under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B)(ii) as such challenge is not properly before the court at this time. It is further ORDERED that costs are taxed against plaintiff, for which execution may issue. The clerk of the court is DIRECTED to enter this document on the civil pursuant to Rule 58 of docket the as a final Federal Rules judgment of Civil Procedure. This case is closed. DONE, this the 2nd day of February, 2015. /s/ Myron H. Thompson UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
]]>
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.
