Johnson v. Maples et al
ORDER directing service on Defendants by the U.S. Marshal; the U.S. Marshal is directed to serve a copy of the complaint (docket entry #2), amended complaints (docket entries #5 & #9), addendum (docket entry #10), this order, and summons, upon Defendants, without prepayment of fees and costs or security therefor. Signed by Magistrate Judge H. David Young on 11/17/08. (mkf)
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS BATESVILLE DIVISION FREDERICK JOHNSON ADC #124034 V. MAPLES et al. ORDE R Plaintiff filed this complaint on April 7, 2008. Plaintiff filed an amended complaint on April 23, 2008, another amended complaint on May 2, 2008, and an addendum on May 22, 2008. Although Plaintiff's complaint is not a model of clarity, it appears that he is alleging that Defendants attempted to forcibly enroll him in a rehabilitative program that was detrimental to his health, and violated his religious beliefs. According to Plaintiff, this may have been done to secure additional funding, or as a result of racial prejudice. Plaintiff also suggests he was moved to another prison unit in retaliation for exercising his constitutional rights, and was improperly classified as a result of the incident. Construing Plaintiff's complaint liberally, the Court concludes that, for screening purposes, he has stated a cognizable claim for relief against Defendants. IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED THAT service is appropriate on Defendants, and the United States Marshal is directed to serve a copy of the complaint (docket entry #2), amended complaints (docket entries #5 & #9), addendum (docket entry #10), this order, and summons, upon Defendants, without prepayment of fees and costs or security therefor. DATED this 17 th day of November, 2008. NO: 1:08CV00020 JMM/HDY DEFENDANTS PLAINTIFF
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?