Dean v. Giles et al (INMATE2), No. 2:2007cv00342 - Document 46 (M.D. Ala. 2009)
Court Description: ORDER: (1) The 45 REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION is ADOPTED; (2) Defendants Allen, Giles, and Longmire's Motion for Summary Judgment (Doc. 27 , 40 ) is GRANTED; (3) Plaintiff's complaint (Doc. 1 ) against Defendants Allen, Giles, and Longmi re is DISMISSED with prejudice; (4) Defendants PHS, Inc., and Liebe's (identified in the complaint as "B. Luke") motion for summary judgment (Doc. 28 ) is GRANTED to the extent it seeks dismissal of the case due to Plaintiff's fa ilure to properly exhaust his administrative remedies; and (5) The complaint (Doc. 1 ) against Defendants PHS, Inc., and Liebe is DISMISSED with prejudice for Plaintiff's failure to exhaust his administrative remedies in accord with 42 U.S.C. 1997e(a). Final judgment will be separately entered. Signed by Honorable William Keith Watkins on 12/11/2009. (dmn)
Download PDF
<![CDATA[
Dean v. Giles et al (INMATE2) Doc. 46 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF ALABAMA NORTHERN DIVISION RODNEY C. DEAN, # 244 759, ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) Plaintiff, v. WARDEN J.C. GILES, et al., Defendants. CASE NO. 2:07-CV-342-WKW ORDER There being no objections filed to the Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge (“Recommendation”) (Doc. # 45), and after an independent review, it is ORDERED that: (1) The Recommendation is ADOPTED; (2) Defendants Allen, Giles, and Longmire’s motion for summary judgment (Doc. # 27, 40) is GRANTED; (3) Plaintiff’s complaint (Doc. # 1) against Defendants Allen, Giles, and Longmire is DISMISSED with prejudice; (4) Defendants PHS, Inc., and Liebe’s (identified in the complaint as “B. Luke”) motion for summary judgment (Doc. # 28) is GRANTED to the extent it seeks dismissal of the case due to Plaintiff’s failure to properly exhaust his administrative remedies; and, (5) The complaint (Doc. # 1) against Defendants PHS, Inc., and Liebe is DISMISSED with prejudice for Plaintiff’s failure to exhaust his administrative Dockets.Justia.com remedies in accord with 42 U.S.C. § 1997e(a). Final judgment will be separately entered. DONE this 11th day of December, 2009. /s/ W. Keith Watkins 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.
