Kendrick et al v. Dunavion et al
ORDER ADOPTING 17 REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS in their entirety as this Court's findings in all respects--except to the extent that it directs dismissal to count as a strike; denying as moot all pending motions 10 16 12 22 ; pltf's complaint is DISMISSED with prejudice for failure to state a claim upon which relief may be granted; the Court certifies that an ifp appeal taken from the order and judgment dismissing this action is considered frivolous and not in good faith. Signed by Judge William R. Wilson, Jr on 11/13/08. (mkf)
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS BATESVILLE DIVISION CATHERYNNE W. KENDRICK et al. ADC #708204 V. LAVANDO K. DUNAVION et al. ORDER The Court has reviewed the Proposed Findings and Recommended Disposition submitted by United States Magistrate Judge H. David Young, and the objections filed. Again, as mentioned in footnote 3 of the Recommended Disposition, all of Ms. Kendrick's claims, other than her claims for lost, stolen, or destroyed property, have been voluntarily abandoned. Thus, this Order only applies to the property claims she has raised here. After carefully considering the objections and making a de novo review of the record in this case, the Court concludes that the Proposed Findings and Recommended Disposition are approved and adopted in their entirety as this Court's findings in all respects -- except to the extent that it directs dismissal to count as a strike. IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED THAT: 1. Plaintiff's complaint is DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE for failure to state a claim upon 1:08CV00044-WRW-HDY DEFENDANTS PLAINTIFFS
which relief may be granted. 2. 3. All pending motions are DENIED AS MOOT. The Court certifies that an in forma pauperis appeal taken from the order and judgment
dismissing this action is considered frivolous and not in good faith. DATED this 13th day of November, 2008. /s/Wm. R. Wilson, Jr. UNITED STATES DISTRICT 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?