Benny Earl Yauger, Jr. v. Cindy Chapman Gray, et al.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ALABAMA WESTERN DIVISION BENNY EARL YAUGER, JR., ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) v. ) Case No. 7:22-cv-01497-MHH-SGC ) CINDY CHAPMAN GRAY, et al., ) ) Defendants. ) MEMORANDUM OPINION On March 13, 2026, the Magistrate Judge entered a report in which she recommended that the Court treat the defendants’ special report as a motion for summary judgment in part and a motion to dismiss in part. (Doc. 56). The Magistrate Judge recommended that the Court grant the defendants’ motion as to Mr. Yauger’s claims against the defendants in their official capacity. (Doc. 56, pp. 8–9). The Magistrate Judge also recommended that the Court dismiss Mr. Yauger’s federal claims against the defendants in their individual capacity because Mr. Yauger has not properly exhausted his administrative remedies. (Doc. 56, pp. 9–13). Finally, the Magistrate Judge recommended that the Court dismiss the Mr. Yauger’s state law claims for negligence and medical malpractice without prejudice. (Doc. 56, pp. 13–14). The Magistrate Judge advised the parties of their right to file objections within 14 days of the report and recommendation, (Doc. 56, pp. 14-15); to date, the Court has not received objections.

After consideration of the record in this case, the Court adopts the Magistrate Judge’s report and accepts the Magistrate Judge’s recommendation. Consistent with that recommendation, the Court grants the defendants’ motion for summary judgment with respect to Mr. Yauger’s federal claims against the defendants in their official capacity. The Court dismisses without prejudice Mr. Yauger’s federal claims against the defendants in their individual capacity for failure to exhaust administrative remedies. The Court declines to exercise supplemental jurisdiction over and dismisses without prejudice Mr. Yauger’s state law claims.

The Court will enter a final order closing this case.!

DONE and ORDERED this March 31, 2026.

Made. I Sa _ UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE ' The statute of limitations for Mr. Yauger’s state law claims has been tolled while the claims were pending in this action, and the tolling will continue for a period of 30 days after the Court enters the dismissal order in this case “unless state law provides for a longer tolling period.” 28 U.S.C. § 1367(d); Weinrib v. Duncan, 962 So. 3d 167, 169-70 (Ala. 2007).