Ashley v. Robinson et al
ORDER granting defts' 57 Motion for Summary Judgment. Signed by Judge D. P. Marshall Jr. on 7/8/11. (vjt)
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS
Case No. 4:10-cv-586-DPM
JEREMY HAMMONS, Detective;
BILL JACKSON, Detective;
LANCE SMITH, Deputy; and
BRUCE PENNINGTON, Sheriff
Ricky Ashley has not-responded to Defendants' motion for summary
judgment, which was supported by a statement of undisputed facts,
affidavits, and an admirably short brief on the law. Ashley has not met proof
with proof. Celotex Corp. v. Catrett, 477 u.s. 317,324 (1986). Though the Court
disagrees with the fall-back argument from Rooker-Feldman, for the other
reasons argued in Defendants' brief, Ashley's complaint fails as a matter of
law. Motion, Document No. 57, granted. An in forma pauperis appeal of this
order and the accompanying judgment would not be in good faith.
U.s.C.A. § 1915(a)(3) (West 2006).
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?