Borrero v. USA

Filing 70

ORDER overruling 67 Objections and adopting 66 Recommendation as supplemented. The United States' 53 Motion for Summary Judgment is granted. Borrero's 41 & 48 Motions for Partial Summary Judgment are denied. 69 Motion to strike is denied as moot. The complaint will be dismissed with prejudice. Signed by Judge D. P. Marshall Jr. on 5/8/2017. (jak)

Download PDF
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS EASTERN DIVISION LAZARO DESPAIGNE BORRERO, Reg #12973-074 v. PLAINTIFF No. 2:16-cv-61-DPM UNITED STATES OF AMERICA DEFENDANT ORDER The Court overrules Borrero' s objections, Ng 6 7, and, on de nova review, adopts Magistrate Judge Volpe's recommendation, Ng 66, as supplemented. FED. R. Crv. P. 72(b)(3). This Court lacks FTCA jurisdiction over Barrera's hernia-related claim because he didn't raise it in his administrative claim. McNeil v. United States, 508 U.S. 106, 113 (1993). Borrero does not present the compelling circumstances required by law for appointment of a medical expert to assist in his case. Rueben v. United States, 2014 WL 5460574 (E.D. Ark. 2014). And Barrera's understandable frustration with the delays in, and course of, his medical care is insufficient to create disputed material fact issues on whether the United States acted negligently. The United States' motion for summary judgment, Ng 53, is granted. Barrera's motions for partial summary judgment, Ng 41 & 48, are denied. Borrero's motion to strike, Ng 69, is denied as moot. The complaint will be dismissed with prejudice. So Ordered. D.P. Marshall Jr. United States District Judge -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?