Meadows v. Anderson et al

Filing 118

ORDER ADOPTING 103 the recommended disposition; granting 81 the defendants' motion for summary judgment, and dismissing, with prejudice, plaintiff's claims against Bobbie Allison, Donald Anderson, Corizon Inc., Jennifer Simmons, and Brenda Tetrick; and denying as moot 105 the plaintiff's motion for ruling. Signed by Chief Judge Brian S. Miller on 11/7/2014. (kdr)

Download PDF
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS NORTHERN DIVISION TERESE MARIE MEADOWS ADC #707979 v. PLAINTIFF NO: 1:12CV00089 BSM DONALD ANDERSON, et al. DEFENDANTS ORDER The recommended disposition submitted by United States Magistrate Judge Beth Deere has been received, along with objections filed by the plaintiff. An evidentiary hearing was held on November 5, 2014, in which plaintiff’s testimony was received and the parties were given an opportunity to clarify the issues and their positions. After hearing from the plaintiff and carefully reviewing the entire record, de novo, it is concluded that the recommended disposition should be adopted. The recommended disposition is adopted on the merits of defendants’ motion for summary judgment because the evidence in the record is undisputed that plaintiff’s medical condition worsened at a rapid pace and that defendants promptly cared for her. The record is devoid of facts indicating that defendants’ actions were so inappropriate as to constitute deliberate indifference. Defendants are therefore entitled to judgment as a matter of law. IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED THAT: 1. The motion for summary judgment filed by defendants [Doc. No. 81] is granted, and plaintiff’s claims against Bobbie Allison, Donald Anderson, Corizon Inc., 1 Jennifer Simmons, and Brenda Tetrick are dismissed with prejudice. 2. Plaintiff’s motion for ruling [Doc. No. 105] is denied as moot. DATED this 7th day of November 2014. UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 2

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?