Coleman v. Lockhart et al

Filing 11

ORDER ADOPTING 4 Partial Report and Recommendations with exception; pltf's false disciplinary allegations against Lockhart, Eldridge, Williams, and Doe are DISMISSED for failure to state a claim; pltf's grievance and disciplinary appeal allegations against defts Williams, Burl, and May are DISMISSED for failure to state a claim; defts Williams, Burl, Doe, and May are DISMISSED from pltf's complaint. Signed by Judge J. Leon Holmes on 11/1/13. (vjt)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS
EASTERN DIVISION
DELWRICK D. COLEMAN,
ADC #656538
v.

PLAINTIFF

No. 2:13CV00131 JLH-JTK

D. LOCKHART, et al.

DEFENDANTS
ORDER

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 with the following exception. The proposed findings stated that
Delwrick Coleman’s complaint admits that he refused Lockhart’s orders to remove a blanket hanging
in his cell and that he used profanity against Lockhart during the incident. Coleman objects because
he did not allege that he refused the order to remove a blanket hanging from his cell. Even so, he
admits that he used profanity toward Lockhart, as well as a racial epithet, which would be considered
insolence. Both the use of profanity and insolence toward a correctional officer are a violation of the
rules of the Arkansas Department of Correction. Furthermore, even though Coleman did not allege
that he refused an order to remove the blanket, he does allege that he refused a direct order of
another correctional officer, Lieutenant Lane, to submit to restraints. Document #2 at 4. Those facts
are repeated in the denial of the grievance appeal that is attached to Coleman’s complaint. Document
#2 at 16. As Magistrate Judge Kearney concluded, there was some evidence to report the disciplinary
decision, and Coleman admits that the evidence existed in his complaint.

IT IS, THEREFORE, ORDERED that:
1.

Plaintiff’s false disciplinary allegations against defendants Lockhart, Eldridge,

Williams, and Doe are DISMISSED for failure to state a claim.
2.

Plaintiff’s grievance and disciplinary appeal allegations against defendants Williams,

Burl, and May are DISMISSED for failure to state a claim.
3.

Defendants Williams, Burl, Doe, and May are DISMISSED from plaintiff’s complaint.

IT IS SO ORDERED this 1st day of November, 2013.

_________________________________
J. LEON HOLMES
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

2