IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

MIDDLE DISTRICT OF ALABAMA

SOUTHERN DIVISION

ANGELA DENISE NAILS, *

*

PLAINTIFF, * 1:06-CV-00737.WKW

*

vs. *

*

DOTHAN RESCUE MISSION, *

*

DEFENDANT. *

DEFENDANT S RESPONSE TO PLAINTIFF S

 OBJECTION TO RECOMMENDATION 

THE DEFENDANT, the Dothan Rescue Mission, responds to

the Plaintiff s Objection to Recommendation  filed on or

about March 19, 2007, moves the Court to refrain from

considering the Plaintiff s Objection to Recommendation, or

in the alternative, to DENY and/or Strike portions of the

 Objection to Recommendation.  In support the Defendant

states:

1. The Plaintiff s Objection to Recommendation 

fails to put forth any evidence creating or tending to

create a genuine issue of material fact. 

2. This Court s Recommendation of March 5, 2007,

notifies the Plaintiff in clear and concise terms how she

must object to this Court s Recommendation. 

3. The March 5th Recommendation reads in relevant

Case 1:06-cv-00737-WKW-SRW Document 58 Filed 03/20/2007 Page 1 of 4
Page 2 of 4

part: Any objections filed must specifically identify the

findings in the Magistrate Judge s Recommendation objected

to. Frivolous, conclusive or general objections will not be

considered by the District Court. 

4. The Plaintiff s objection does not conform to the

clear requirements of the Recommendation, and contains

general, conclusory and unsupported arguments and

objections.

5. On Page 11 of her Objection to Recommendation, 

Nails seeks to increase her damage demand to $1,000,000.00

(One Million Dollars). 

6. This Court s Scheduling Order of November 1, 2006,

sets the deadline to amend pleadings as November 28, 2006.

7. The time for amending any claims is well past due.

8. Plaintiff cites to City Code of OrdinancesUtilities Section 102 on page 13 of her Objection to

Recommendation.  

9. The Plaintiff has never produced a copy of this

Ordinance in her initial disclosures nor in her responses to

the Defendant s Request for Production. The Plaintiff did

not mention this Ordinance in her responses to the

Defendant s Interrogatories. 

Case 1:06-cv-00737-WKW-SRW Document 58 Filed 03/20/2007 Page 2 of 4
Page 3 of 4

10. The Defendant is not mentioned anywhere in

Ordinance Number 102. This Ordinance sets the utility rates

for utility users in the City of Dothan. Section 102-63

does establish lower utility rates for non-profit

organizations within the City of Dothan. Nowhere in the

Ordinance does the City of Dothan claim to pay the utilities

for the Defendant or any other non-profit organization. 

11. This Court s Scheduling Order of November 1, 2006, 

clearly set the deadline for discovery in this matter as

March 1, 2007.

12. The Plaintiff s attempt to submit new evidence

after the March 1 discovery deadline is improper, and the

Defendant would be prejudiced if this Ordinance is

considered because the Ordinance was never disclosed, has

never been authenticated, and is not relevant and material.

WHEREFORE, the Defendant moves the Court to refrain

from considering or to DENY and/or Strike the Plaintiff s

 Objection to Recommendation  to this Court s Recommendation

of March 5, 2007. 

HARDWICK, HAUSE, SEGREST & WALDING

Case 1:06-cv-00737-WKW-SRW Document 58 Filed 03/20/2007 Page 3 of 4
Page 4 of 4

BY: /s/ Kevin Walding 

Kevin Walding (WAL036)

BY: /s/ Patrick B. Moody 

Patrick B. Moody (MOO110)

Attorneys for Defendant

Post Office Box 1469

Dothan, Alabama 36302

Phone (334)794-4144

Fax (334)671-9330

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I hereby certify that, this date, I have served a copy

of this document on the following individual(s) and/or

attorney(s) of record by placing same in the United States

Mail in a properly addressed envelope with prepaid postage.

Angela Denise Nails

342 South Saint Andrews Street

Apartment 808

Dothan, Alabama 36301

This the 20th day of March, 2007.

 /s/ Kevin Walding 

Of Counsel

Case 1:06-cv-00737-WKW-SRW Document 58 Filed 03/20/2007 Page 4 of 4