Bradley v. Outlaw

Filing 13

ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS 11 and denying 8 Motion to Amend/Correct filed by Cory Deontra Bradley. No certificate of appealability is justified. Signed by Judge D. P. Marshall Jr. on 9/22/11. (kpr)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS

EASTERN DIVISION

CORY D. BRADLEY

Reg #31675-044

v.

PETITIONER

Case No. 2:11-cv-120-DPM

T.C. OUTLAW

RESPONDENT
ORDER

The Court has considered Magistrate Judge H. David Young's proposed
findings and recommendations, Document No. 11, to which Cory Bradley does
not object. Mter reviewing the proposal for clear factual error on the face of
the record, FED. R. CIV. P. 72(b) (1983 advisory committee note), and for legal
error, the Court adopts the proposal as its own. Bradley's petition duplicates
one the Court dismissed with prejudice in July. Bradley v. Outlaw, 2:11-cv-72­
DPM. Moreover, he needs permission from the Court of Appeals before he
may file a successive petition.
The Court also denies Bradley's motion to amend. While a court should
11

freely give leave [to amend a pleading] when justice so requires," FED. R.

CIV. P.15(a)(2), justice does not require permitting amendment here. Bradley
now seeks damages under the Federal Tort Claims Act. In this action Bradley

paid the $5 filing fee appropriate for a habeas petition; if he wishes to pursue
his tort claim, he must file a new complaint.
Petition dismissed without prejudice. Motion, Document No.8, denied.
And no certificate of appealability is justified.
So Ordered.

D.P. Marshah Jr.
::/
United States District Judge

-2­