Moore v. Brooks et al (INMATE 2), No. 2:2015cv00062 - Document 13 (M.D. Ala. 2015)
Court Description: OPINION AND ORDER: it is ORDERED that: (1) The 9 recommendation of the US Magistrate Judge is adopted; (2) The plf's 5 motion for preliminary injunction is denied. Signed by Honorable Judge Myron H. Thompson on 4/30/2015. (wcl, )
Download PDF
<![CDATA[
Moore v. Brooks et al (INMATE 2) Doc. 13 IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF ALABAMA, NORTHERN DIVISION SAMUEL MOORE, ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) v. ) ) OFFICER BROOKS and OFFICER ) (SGT.) TEAL, ) ) Defendants. ) CIVIL ACTION NO. 2:15cv62-MHT (WO) OPINION AND ORDER This cause is before the court on the recommendation of the United States Magistrate Judge that the plaintiff’s motion injunction be denied. sought to be moved for a preliminary In his motion, the plaintiff from Easterling Correctional Facility to another prison due to alleged harassment and threats by correctional officers in retaliation for plaintiff’s lawsuits. There are no objections to the recommendation; in addition, the plaintiff’s copy of the recommendation was returned to the clerk’s office as undeliverable because the plaintiff is no longer Dockets.Justia.com incarcerated at Easterling. *** Accordingly, after an independent and de novo review of the record, it is ORDERED that: (1) The recommendation of the United States Magistrate Judge (doc. no. 9) is adopted. (2) The plaintiff’s motion for preliminary injunction (doc. no. 5) is denied. DONE, this the 30th day of April, 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.
