Hardy v. Budnik et al

Filing 5

ORDER adopting 4 Proposed Findings and Recommended Disposition in their entirety as this Court's findings in all respects. Plaintiff's complaint against defendants is DISMISSED, for failure to state a claim. This dismissal constitutes a s trike within the meaning of the Prison Litigation Reform Act, 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g). The Court certifies, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3), that an in forma pauperis appeal from this Order and the accompanying Judgment would not be taken in good faith. Signed by Judge J. Leon Holmes on 6/4/2014. (ks)

Download PDF
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS NORTHERN DIVISION LAMARCUS HARDY, ADC #148123 v. PLAINTIFF No. 1:14CV00040-JLH-JJV STEPHANIE BUDNIK, Counselor, ADC Grimes Unit; et al. DEFENDANTS ORDER The Court has reviewed the Proposed Findings and Recommended Disposition submitted by United States Magistrate Judge Joe J. Volpe. No objections have been filed. After careful consideration, the Court concludes that the Proposed Findings and Recommended Disposition should be, and hereby are, approved and adopted in their entirety as this Court’s findings in all respects. IT IS, THEREFORE, ORDERED that: 1. Plaintiff’s complaint against defendants is DISMISSED, for failure to state a claim. 2. This dismissal constitutes a “strike” within the meaning of the Prison Litigation Reform Act, 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g). 3. The Court certifies, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3), that an in forma pauperis appeal from this Order and the accompanying Judgment would not be taken in good faith. IT IS SO ORDERED this 4th day of June, 2014. __________________________________ J. LEON HOLMES 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?