Cornett v. Alabama Department of Transportation (MAG+), No. 2:2017cv00335 - Document 49 (M.D. Ala. 2018)

Court Description: OPINION and ORDER directing as follows: (1) the plf's 48 objections be and are hereby OVERRULED; (2) the 46 REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION of the Magistrate Judge be and is hereby ADOPTED; (3) the defs' 12 Motion to Dismiss be and is hereby DENIED as moot; (4) the defs' 41 Motion to Dismiss the amended complaint be and is hereby GRANTED; (5) this case be and is hereby DISMISSED with prejudice. Signed by Honorable Judge Emily C. Marks on 11/7/18. (djy, )

Download PDF
Cornett v. Alabama Department of Transportation (MAG+) Doc. 49 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF ALABAMA NORTHERN DIVISION JAMES D. CORNETT, Plaintiff, v. ALABAMA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION, et al., Defendants. ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CIV. ACT. NO. 2:17cv335-ECM OPINION and ORDER On September 5, 2018, the Magistrate Judge entered a Recommendation granting the defendants’ motion to dismiss the amended complaint (doc. # 41), denying as moot the defendants’ motion to dismiss (doc. # 12) and dismissing the plaintiff’s claims with prejudice. See Doc. # 46. On September 19, 2018, the plaintiff filed objections to the order of the Magistrate Judge. See Doc. # 48. The Court has carefully reviewed the record in this case, the Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge, and the plaintiff’s objections. Upon an independent review of the file in this case and for good cause, it is ORDERED as follows: 1. The plaintiff’s objections be and are hereby OVERRULED. 2. The Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge be and is hereby ADOPTED. Dockets.Justia.com 3. The defendants’ motion to dismiss (doc. # 12) be and is hereby DENIED as moot. 4. The defendants’ motion to dismiss the amended complaint (doc. # 41) be and is hereby GRANTED 5. This case be and is hereby DISMISSED with prejudice. A final judgment will be entered. DONE this 7th day of November, 2018. /s/ Emily C. Marks EMILY C. MARKS 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.