Case Name: Michael P. MURPHY, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Michelle MARTIN, et al., Defendants, Officer Johns, Defendant-Appellee
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2006-07-07
Citations: 190 F. App'x 764
Docket Number: No. 06-11150; D.C. Docket No. 05-00301-CY-BBM-1
Parties: Michael P. MURPHY, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Michelle MARTIN, et al., Defendants, Officer Johns, Defendant-Appellee.
Judges: Before DUBINA, BLACK and HULL, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 190
Pages: 764–765

Head Matter:
Michael P. MURPHY, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Michelle MARTIN, et al., Defendants, Officer Johns, Defendant-Appellee.
No. 06-11150
Non-Argument Calendar.
D.C. Docket No. 05-00301-CY-BBM-1.
United States Court of Appeals, Eleventh Circuit.
July 7, 2006.
McNeill Stokes, Atlanta, GA, for Plaintiff-Appellant.
Annarita McGovern Busbee, Seacrest, Karesh, Tate & Bicknese, LLP, Atlanta, GA, for Defendant-Appellee.
Before DUBINA, BLACK and HULL, Circuit Judges.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM:
Michael P. Murphy appeals the district court's grant of summary judgment to Officer Courtney Johns in Murphy's 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action. Murphy asserts the district court erred in: (1) holding he had not exhausted his remedies under the Prison Litigation Reform Act, 42 U.S.C. § 1997e(a); (2) concluding an action cannot be brought under § 1983 for violations of civil rights that are defined as "torture" under 18 U.S.C. § 2340A; and (3) declining to exercise supplemental jurisdiction over his remaining state law claims. After a de novo review of the parties' arguments and the record, we affirm for the reasons stated in the district court's well-reasoned February 13, 2006, Order granting Johns' motion for summary judgment.
AFFIRMED.