McNeal v. Alabama Department of Corrections et al (Inmate 3), No. 2:2023cv00660 - Document 30 (M.D. Ala. 2024)
Court Description: OPINION. Signed by Honorable Judge Myron H. Thompson on 10/28/2024. (c/s) (LAB)
Download PDF
<![CDATA[
McNeal v. Alabama Department of Corrections et al (Inmate 3) Doc. 30 IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF ALABAMA, NORTHERN DIVISION ANDREW E. McNEAL, Plaintiff, v. ALABAMA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS and ALABAMA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS TRAINING CENTER, Defendants. ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CIVIL ACTION NO. 2:23cv660-MHT (WO) OPINION Pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983, plaintiff, who is incarcerated this lawsuit at Staton asserting Correctional Facility, that working persons filed at the correctional facility tapped his phone and improperly shared false information about his personal life. This lawsuit is now before the court on the recommendation of the United States Magistrate Judge that plaintiff’s case be dismissed without prejudice for failure to obey court orders to file an amended complaint that complies with the court’s instructions. There are no objections Dockets.Justia.com to the recommendation. After an independent and de novo review of the record, the court concludes that the magistrate judge’s recommendation should be adopted.* An appropriate judgment will be entered. DONE, this the 28th day of October, 2024. /s/ Myron H. Thompson UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE * The court notes a minor error in the report recommendation: where the magistrate judge refers the plaintiff’s amended complaint filed on August 2024, as Doc. 25, the correct citation is to Doc. See Report and Recommendation (Doc. 29) at 4. 2 and to 6, 26.
]]>
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.
