Barfield v. Hetzel (INMATE1), No. 2:2011cv01114 - Document 48 (M.D. Ala. 2015)
Court Description: ORDER directing that, there being no timely objection filed to the Recommendation, and after a review of the file, the Recommendation is ADOPTED, and it is hereby ORDERED as follows: (1) The Defendant's Motion for Summary Judgment is GRANTED; (2 ) Judgment is GRANTED in favor of Defendant Hetzel; (3) This case is DISMISSED with prejudice; (4) Costs are taxed against the Plaintiff; (5) Final Judgment will be entered in accordance with this order. Signed by Honorable Judge W. Harold Albritton, III on February 23, 2015. (scn, )
Download PDF
<![CDATA[
Barfield v. Hetzel (INMATE1) Doc. 48 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF ALABAMA NORTHERN DIVISION KEVIN BARFIELD, #185340, ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) Plaintiff, vs. GARY HETZEL, Defendant. CASE NO. 2:11cv-1114-WHA (WO) ORDER This case is before the court on the Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge (Doc. #46), entered on January 29, 2015. There being no timely objection filed to the Recommendation, and after a review of the file, the Recommendation is ADOPTED, and it is hereby ORDERED as follows: 1. The Defendant’s Motion for Summary Judgment is GRANTED. 2. Judgment is GRANTED in favor of Defendant Hetzel. 3. This case is DISMISSED with prejudice. 4. Costs are taxed against the Plaintiff. 5. Final Judgment will be entered in accordance with this order. DONE this 23RD day of February, 2015. /s/ W. Harold Albritton W. HAROLD ALBRITTON SENIOR UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE Dockets.Justia.com
]]>
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.
