Henry v. Spicer et al

Filing 24

ORDER adopting 23 Recommendation; granting 19 Motion for Summary Judgment. Henry's equal protection claim will be dismissed with prejudice. Signed by Judge D. P. Marshall Jr. on 8/10/2015. (ks) (Docket text modified on 8/10/2015 to correct a typographical error in the linkage.) (thd).

Download PDF
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS NORTHERN DIVISION ANTHONY HENRY ADC #140754 v. PLAINTIFF No.1:14-cv-71-DPM-BD KANE SPICER, Corporal, Grimes Unit DEFENDANT ORDER Unopposed recommendation, NQ 23, adopted with corrections* as modified. FED. R. Crv. P. 72(b) (1983 Addition to Advisory Committee Notes). Henry's claim is one of disparate treatment, not disparate impact. Nonetheless, Henry has not identified affirmative evidence from which a jury could find discriminatory motive. Lewis v. Jacks, 486 F.3d 1025, 1028 (8th Cir. 2007). Motion for summary judgment, NQ 19, granted. Henry's equal protection claim will be dismissed with prejudice. *The Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc., citation on page 2 should be to pages 247-48 of the opinion. In the second paragraph under the "Equal Protection Claim" heading, the two citations to" (#4, p. 22)" should be to NQ 20-3 at 5-6. And the Weiler v. Purkett quote on page 3 should read: "The heart of an equal protection claim is that similarly situated classes of inmates are treated differently, and that this difference in treatment bears no rational relation to any legitimate penal interest." So Ordered. D.P. Marshall Jr. United States District Judge a -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?