Davis v. Givens (INMATE 2), No. 2:2020cv00058 - Document 23 (N.D. Ala. 2021)
Court Description: MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER - Having carefully reviewed and considered de novo all the materials in the court file, including the report and recommendation, the court ADOPTS the magistrate judge's report and ACCEPTS her recommendation. Signed by Judge Annemarie Carney Axon on 8/9/2021. (KEK)
Download PDF
<![CDATA[
Davis v. Givens (INMATE 2) Doc. 23 FILED 2021 Aug-09 PM 02:13 U.S. DISTRICT COURT N.D. OF ALABAMA UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ALABAMA SOUTHERN DIVISION JAMES HENRY DAVIS, Plaintiff, v. GWENDOLYN GIVENS, Defendant. ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) Case No. 2:20-cv-00058-ACA-SGC MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER Plaintiff James Henry Davis filed a pro se complaint pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983, alleging violations of his rights under the Constitution or laws of the United States. (Doc. 1). The magistrate judge entered a report on June 28, 2021, recommending that the court: (1) dismiss without prejudice Mr. Davis’ claims against the fictitious parties; (2) grant Defendant Gwendolyn Givens’ motion for summary judgment on Mr. Davis’ claims against Ms. Givens in her official capacity for money damages and dismiss those claims with prejudice; (3) grant Ms. Givens’ motion for summary judgment on Mr. Davis’ Eighth Amendment failure to protect claim and dismiss the claim with prejudice; (4) deny Ms. Givens’ motion for summary judgment on Mr. Davis’ Eighth Amendment conditions of confinement claim; and (5) deny as moot Mr. Davis’ request for injunctive relief. (Doc. 22). Dockets.Justia.com Although the parties were advised of their right to file specific written objections within fourteen days, the court has not received any objections. Having carefully reviewed and considered de novo all the materials in the court file, including the report and recommendation, the court ADOPTS the magistrate judge’s report and ACCEPTS her recommendation. Accordingly, the court: (1) DISMISSES WITHOUT PREJUDICE Mr. Davis’ claims against the fictitious parties; (2) GRANTS Ms. Givens’ motion for summary judgment on Mr. Davis’ claims against Ms. Givens in her official capacity for money damages and on Mr. Davis’ Eighth Amendment failure to protect claim against Ms. Givens; (3) DENIES as MOOT Mr. Davis’ request for injunctive relief; and (4) DENIES Ms. Givens’ motion for summary judgment on Mr. Davis’ Eighth Amendment conditions of confinement claim and REFERS this claim to the magistrate judge for further proceedings. The court will enter a separate partial judgment consistent with this order. DONE and ORDERED this August 9, 2021. _________________________________ ANNEMARIE CARNEY AXON UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 2
]]>
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.
