From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Williams v. Henry

United States District Court, S.D. Alabama, Southern Division
Oct 15, 2009
CIVIL ACTION NO. 09-00132-KD-N (S.D. Ala. Oct. 15, 2009)

Opinion

CIVIL ACTION NO. 09-00132-KD-N.

October 15, 2009


ORDER


After due and proper consideration of all portions of this file deemed relevant to the issues raised, and a de novo determination of those portions of the Report and Recommendation to which objection is made, the Report and Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge made under 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) is ADOPTED as the opinion of this Court with the following amendment: The Report and Recommendation is amended to reflect that the complaint was filed on March 12, 2009 instead of July 2, 2009.

It is ORDERED that this action be and is hereby DISMISSED, prior to service of process, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B)(i) as frivolous.


Summaries of

Williams v. Henry

United States District Court, S.D. Alabama, Southern Division
Oct 15, 2009
CIVIL ACTION NO. 09-00132-KD-N (S.D. Ala. Oct. 15, 2009)
Case details for

Williams v. Henry

Case Details

Full title:WENDY WILLIAMS, Plaintiff, v. SUMMER HENRY, Defendant

Court:United States District Court, S.D. Alabama, Southern Division

Date published: Oct 15, 2009

Citations

CIVIL ACTION NO. 09-00132-KD-N (S.D. Ala. Oct. 15, 2009)

Citing Cases

Watkins v. Pfizer, Inc.

. “The Supreme Court's Twombly formulation of the pleading standard ‘does not impose a probability…

Morton v. Horton

“The Supreme Court's Twombly formulation of the pleading standard “does not impose a probability requirement…