Winston v. Stewart et al
ORDER ADOPTING 27 Partial Report and Recommendations in their entirety; therefore, pltf's Motion to Amend 15 is GRANTED; defts' Motion to Dismiss 5 is DENIED AS MOOT; defts' 16 Motion to Dismiss Pltf's Amended Complaint is GRANTED IN PART AND DENIED IN PART; defts' 20 Motion to Consolidate is DENIED. Signed by Judge Susan Webber Wright on 4/9/13. (vjt)
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS
CHARLES A. WINSTON,
CHARLES STEWART., et al.
The Court has received proposed findings and recommendations from United States
Magistrate Judge Jerome T. Kearney.
After a review of those proposed findings and
recommendations, and the timely objections received thereto, as well as a de novo review of the
record, the Court adopts them in their entirety. Accordingly,
IT IS, THEREFORE, ORDERED that:
Plaintiff’s Motion to Amend (Doc. No. 15) is GRANTED;
Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss (Doc. No. 5) is DENIED as moot;
Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss Plaintiff’s Amended Complaint (Doc. No. 16) is
GRANTED in part, with respect to Plaintiff’s monetary claims against them in their official
capacities and Plaintiff’s claims against Defendants Wilkins and May;
Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss (Doc. No. 16) is DENIED in part, with respect to
Plaintiff’s retaliation claims against Defendants Stewart, Burl, Earl, Naylor, and Hobbs.
Defendants’ Motion to Consolidate (Doc. No. 20) is DENIED;
IT IS SO ORDERED this 9th day of April, 2013.
/s/Susan Webber Wright
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?