Luttrell v. Outlaw

Filing 61

ORDER adopting 40 Judge Deere's Partial Recommended Disposition; denying 9 , 10 , 13 , 18 , and 33 Motions; and, directing the Clerk to file 17 Luttrell's objection, as his amended complaint. Signed by Judge D. P. Marshall Jr. on 10/12/2011. (dmn)

Download PDF
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS EASTERN DIVISION CHARLES RAY LUTTRELL, Reg #22154-045 v. PLAINTIFF No.2:11-cv-97-DPM-BD T.C. OUTLAW, Warden DEFENDANT ORDER The Court has considered Magistrate Judge Beth Deere's Partial Recommended Disposition, Document No. 40, and Luttrell's objections, Document No. 47. On de novo review, FED. R. CIV. P. 72(b)(3), the Court adopts Judge Deere's recommendation with two additional observations. First, notwithstanding the information in Luttrell's additional filings, he has not shown irreparable harm in his current circumstances: for example, he has gotten medication for his stomach problems and been seen by a gastroenterologist. Document No. 49, at 2. Second, Luttrell has not made a sufficient showing about likely future harm resulting from unremedied current conditions to justify the extraordinary step of injunctive relief. Helling v. McKinney, 509 U.S. 25, 32-35 (1993); Larson v. Kempker, 414 F.3d 936, 940 (8th Cir.2005). Judge Deere's Partial Recommended Disposition, Document No. 40, is adopted as supplemented. Motions, Document Nos. 9, 10, 13, 18 & 33, denied. The Clerk is directed to file Luttrell's objection, Document No. 17, as his amended complaint. So Ordered. D.P. Marshall Jr. United States District Judge 12 October 2011 -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?