-WC Pritchard et al v. Alabama Power Company (MAG+), No. 3:2011cv00228 - Document 21 (M.D. Ala. 2011)
Court Description: JUDGMENT overruling the 19 Plaintiffs' objections; adopting the 18 Recommendation; granting the 14 motion to dismiss and dismissing the case in its entirety without prejudice; denying as moot the 9 motion to dismiss and alternative motio n to stay; taxing costs against plaintiffs for which execution may issue; directing the Clerk to enter this document on the civil docket as a final judgment pursuant to Rule 58 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. Signed by Honorable Judge Myron H. Thompson on 8/17/2011. (Attachments: # 1 Civil Appeals Checklist)(br, )
Download PDF
-WC Pritchard et al v. Alabama Power Company (MAG+) Doc. 21 IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF ALABAMA, EASTERN DIVISION JAMES CARL PRITCHARD, JR., individually, and GAYNELLE P. WILLOUGHBY, individually, Plaintiffs, v. ALABAMA POWER COMPANY, Defendant. ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CIVIL ACTION NO. 3:11cv228-MHT (WO) JUDGMENT In accordance with the memorandum opinion entered this date, it is the ORDER, JUDGMENT, and DECREE of the court as follows: (1) Plaintiffs James Carl Pritchard, Jr. and Gaynelle P. Willoughby’s objections (doc. no. 19) are overruled. (2) The United States Magistrate Judge’s recommendation (doc. no. 18) is adopted. (3) Defendant Alabama Power Company’s motion to dismiss (doc. no. 14) is granted and this case Dockets.Justia.com is dismissed in its entirety without prejudice. (4) Defendant Alabama Power Company’s motion to dismiss and alternative motion to stay (doc. no. 9) are denied as moot. It is further ORDERED that costs are taxed against plaintiffs Pritchard and Willoughby, for which execution may issue. The clerk of the court is DIRECTED to enter this document on the civil docket as a final judgment pursuant to Rule 58 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. This case is closed. DONE, this the 17th day of August, 2011. /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.