Austin v. Haley

M.D. Alabama

Austin v. Haley

212 F. Supp. 2d 1339, 2002 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 14050, 2002 WL 1769938

District Court, M.D. Alabama·Decided July 25, 2002·No. Civ.A. 95-T-637-N·Published

Opinion

ORDER

MYRON H. THOMPSON, District Judge.

Counsel for defendant Michael Haley having indicated during a conference on July 24, 2002, that, in light of Hope v. Pelzer, — U.S.-, 122 S.Ct. 2508, 153 L.Ed.2d 666 (2002), the Alabama Department of Corrections does not intend to resume use of the hitching post or restraining bar, it is ORDERED that any additional relief in this litigation is unnecessary and thus is denied. Austin v. Hopper, 15 F.Supp.2d 1210, 1272-1274 (M.D.Ala.1998) (discussing what additional relief, if any, might be appropriate).

It is further ORDERED that the plaintiffs are allowed until August 7, 2002, to file any request for attorney’s fees, expenses, and costs.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

ORDER

MYRON H. THOMPSON, District Judge.

Counsel for defendant Michael Haley having indicated during a conference on July 24, 2002, that, in light of Hope v. Pelzer, — U.S.-, 122 S.Ct. 2508, 153 L.Ed.2d 666 (2002), the Alabama Department of Corrections does not intend to resume use of the hitching post or restraining bar, it is ORDERED that any additional relief in this litigation is unnecessary and thus is denied. Austin v. Hopper, 15 F.Supp.2d 1210, 1272-1274 (M.D.Ala.1998) (discussing what additional relief, if any, might be appropriate).

It is further ORDERED that the plaintiffs are allowed until August 7, 2002, to file any request for attorney’s fees, expenses, and costs.

Austin v. Haley, 212 F. Supp. 2d 1339, 2002 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 14050, 2002 WL 1769938 (M.D. Ala. 2002).

Pincite

212 F. Supp. 2d 1339 (Austin v. Haley) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related