Tullis v. Corizon HealthCare, 2:15cv92-MHT. (2018)
Court: District Court, M.D. Alabama
Number: infdco20180221f18
Visitors: 9
Filed: Feb. 20, 2018
Latest Update: Feb. 20, 2018
Summary: OPINION MYRON H. THOMPSON , District Judge . Pursuant to 42 U.S.C. 1983 and Alabama state law, plaintiff, a state prisoner, filed this lawsuit claiming that defendants caused her pain and suffering by providing substandard medical care. This lawsuit is now before the court on the recommendation of the United States Magistrate Judge that defendants' motion for summary judgment be granted. There are no objections to the recommendation. After an independent and de novo review of the record,
Summary: OPINION MYRON H. THOMPSON , District Judge . Pursuant to 42 U.S.C. 1983 and Alabama state law, plaintiff, a state prisoner, filed this lawsuit claiming that defendants caused her pain and suffering by providing substandard medical care. This lawsuit is now before the court on the recommendation of the United States Magistrate Judge that defendants' motion for summary judgment be granted. There are no objections to the recommendation. After an independent and de novo review of the record, t..
More
OPINION
MYRON H. THOMPSON, District Judge.
Pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 and Alabama state law, plaintiff, a state prisoner, filed this lawsuit claiming that defendants caused her pain and suffering by providing substandard medical care. This lawsuit is now before the court on the recommendation of the United States Magistrate Judge that defendants' motion for summary judgment be granted. There are no objections 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, except to the extent that it recommends dismissal of the official-capacity claims against the individual defendants as barred by Eleventh Amendment immunity; the court nonetheless concludes that summary judgment granted should be granted as to all claims, but for a somewhat different reason as to the official-capacity claims. As to those claims, the court finds that summary judgment should be granted for the same reasons set forth in the recommendation with regard to the individual-capacity claims: plaintiff has failed to establish a violation of her constitutional rights.
Source: Leagle
