Armendariz v. Dunn et al (INMATE 2), No. 2:2019cv01046 - Document 178 (M.D. Ala. 2023)

Court Description: OPINION. Signed by Honorable Judge Myron H. Thompson on 3/9/2023. (cwl, )

Download PDF

Armendariz v. Dunn et al (INMATE 2) Doc. 178 IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF ALABAMA, NORTHERN DIVISION DANIEL ARMENDARIZ, ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) v. ) ) COMMISSIONER DUNN, et al., ) ) Defendants. ) CIVIL ACTION NO. 2:19cv1046-MHT (WO) OPINION Pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983, plaintiff, a state prisoner, filed this lawsuit claiming that the defendant correctional officials and employees failed to protect him from being stabbed 16 times by another prisoner and that certain defendants showed deliberate indifference to a substantial risk of serious harm by delaying his receipt of medical care. now before the court on the This lawsuit is recommendation of the United States Magistrate Judge that defendants' motions for summary judgment be granted. objections to the recommendation. There are no After an independent and de novo review of the record, the court concludes Dockets.Justia.com that the magistrate judge’s recommendation should be adopted.* An appropriate judgment will be entered. DONE, this the 9th day of March, 2023. /s/ Myron H. Thompson UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE * The court clarifies that its decision is based on plaintiff’s failure to put forth sufficient evidence in support of his claims to survive summary judgment. To the extent that the recommendation can be read as making affirmative factual findings or concluding that defendants’ actions were constitutional, the court does not adopt those findings, as they are unnecessary to the result, and are not the court’s proper role on summary judgment.

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.