Hampton v. Arkansas Department of Correction et al
ORDER: The Court construes Hampton's 6 Motion for more time as an objection to the proposed recommendation. On de novo review, the Court adopts the 5 recommendation as modified. Her claims against the remaining Defendants are therefore dismissed without prejudice. Signed by Judge D. P. Marshall Jr. on 4/4/2017. (jak)
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS
STORMY LYNN HAMPTON,
ARKANSAS DEPARTMENT OF
CORRECTION, et al.
1. The Court construes Hampton's motion for more time, NQ 6, as an
objection to the proposed recommendation. FED. R. CIV. P. 72(b). Hampton
hasn't filed any more objections since the Court granted the requested
extension; and the time to do so has passed. NQ 7.
2. On de nova review, the Court adopts the recommendation as
modified. NQ 5. Construing the complaint liberally, Hampton has stated a
deliberate indifference claim against Deputy Warden Faust. NQ 2 at 5. But
without more particulars about who did what and when, Hampton hasn't
stated any other claims that can proceed past screening. Her claims against
the remaining Defendants are therefore dismissed without prejudice.
D.P. Marshall Jr.£1
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?