Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-alsd-1_13-cv-00070/USCOURTS-alsd-1_13-cv-00070-0/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 555
Nature of Suit: Prisoner - Prison Condition
Cause of Action: 42:1983 Prisoner Civil Rights

---

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF ALABAMA

SOUTHERN DIVISION

BRENT JACOBY, (AIS: # 291560) *

*

Plaintiff, *

*

vs. * CIVIL ACTION NO. 13-00070-KD-B

*

SHERIFF HUEY MACK, *

*

Defendants. *

REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION

This action is before the Court on Plaintiff Brent Jacoby’s 

Motion to Substitute (Doc. 15). Plaintiff’s lawsuit in this case 

arises out of his placement and treatment while housed at the Baldwin 

County jail in January 2013. (Doc. 1). In the motion, which was filed 

following a Suggestion of Death (Doc. 13) pertaining to Defendant 

Dale Bryne, Jacoby states that he wishes to proceed with his claims 

against Defendants, and indicates that Bryne’s replacement, “Major 

Milton”, should be substituted in his stead because he has not 

rectified the things that Plaintiff complained about in his complaint. 

Upon consideration, Plaintiff’s motion is due to be DENIED.

As a threshold matter, the undersigned notes that Plaintiff’s 

claims against the remaining defendant are not affected by Defendant 

Bryne’s death. Next, Plaintiff has not alleged that Bryne’s

replacement, “Major Milton” had any personal involvement in any of 

his incidents set forth in Plaintiffs’ complaint. Hartley v. Parnell, 

193 F.3d 1263, 1269 (llth Cir. 1999)(To establish supervisory 

Case 1:13-cv-00070-KD-B Document 24 Filed 08/01/14 Page 1 of 3
2

liability under § 1983, a plaintiff must allege either personal

participation by the supervisor or “a causal connection between 

actions of the supervising official and the alleged constitutional 

deprivation.”). Plaintiff’s claim that the policies of which he 

complains are still being promulgated by Defendant Milton is of no 

moment in that the record reflects that Plaintiff was transferred 

from the jail in October 2013 (Docs. 9, 10); thus, his claims for 

declaratory and injunctive relief are moot. See Smith v. Allen, 502 

F.3d 1255, 1267 (11th Cir. 2007) ( “The general rule in our circuit 

is that a transfer or a release of a prisoner from prison will moot 

that prisoner’s claims for injunctive and declaratory relief.”)

abrogated on other grounds by Sossamon v. Texas, 131 S. Ct. 1651, 

179 L. Ed. 2d 700 (2011). Accordingly, Plaintiff motion is due to 

be DENIED. 

Notice of Right to File Objections

A copy of this report and recommendation shall be served on all 

parties in the manner provided by law. Any party who objects to this 

recommendation or anything in it must, within fourteen (14) days of 

the date of service of this document, file specific written objections 

with the Clerk of this Court. See 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1); Fed. R. Civ. 

P. 72(b); S.D. ALA. L.R. 72.4. The parties should note that under 

Eleventh Circuit precedent, “the failure to object limits the scope 

of [] appellate review to plain error review of the magistrate judge’s 

Case 1:13-cv-00070-KD-B Document 24 Filed 08/01/14 Page 2 of 3
3

factual findings.” Dupree v. Warden, Attorney General, State of 

Alabama, 715 F.3d 1295, 1300 (11th Cir. 2011). In order to be 

specific, an objection must identify the specific finding or 

recommendation to which objection is made, state the basis for the 

objection, and specify the place in the Magistrate Judge’s report 

and recommendation where the disputed determination is found. An 

objection that merely incorporates by reference or refers to the 

briefing before the Magistrate Judge is not specific.

DONE this 31st day of July, 2014.

 /s/ SONJA F. BIVINS 

 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 1:13-cv-00070-KD-B Document 24 Filed 08/01/14 Page 3 of 3