From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Nunley v. Mills

United States District Court, N.D. Texas, Dallas Division
Mar 14, 2005
No. 3:04-CV-2515-H (N.D. Tex. Mar. 14, 2005)

Opinion

No. 3:04-CV-2515-H.

March 14, 2005


ORDER


After making the independent review required by 28 U.S.C. § 636(b), the Court finds that the Findings, Conclusions and Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge are correct, and they are adopted as the findings and conclusions of the Court.

IT IS, THEREFORE, ORDERED that the Findings, Conclusions and Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge are ADOPTED, and that the University of Texas Medical Branch is DISMISSED with prejudice because it is absolutely immune under the Eleventh Amendment, and that Plaintiff's claim against Dr. Paul Mills for prescribing the wrong medication is DISMISSED with prejudice as frivolous. See 28 U.S.C. §§ 1915e(2)(B)(i) and (iii), and 1915A(b)(1) and (2).

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that SERVICE OF PROCESS be issued as to Dr. Paul Mills, 1500 East Langdon Road, Dallas, Texas 75241, on Plaintiff's retaliation claims. Since Plaintiff was previously granted leave to proceed in forma pauperis, the Court Clerk shall prepare and issue SUMMONS for Dr. Paul Mills and deliver the same to the United States Marshal for service of process pursuant to Rule 4, Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, along with a copy of the complaint, Plaintiff's answers to the magistrate judge's questionnaire, and the recommendation of the magistrate judge.


Summaries of

Nunley v. Mills

United States District Court, N.D. Texas, Dallas Division
Mar 14, 2005
No. 3:04-CV-2515-H (N.D. Tex. Mar. 14, 2005)
Case details for

Nunley v. Mills

Case Details

Full title:KEITH EDWARD NUNLEY, Plaintiff, v. DR. PAUL MILLS, et al., Defendants

Court:United States District Court, N.D. Texas, Dallas Division

Date published: Mar 14, 2005

Citations

No. 3:04-CV-2515-H (N.D. Tex. Mar. 14, 2005)