Duncan v. Martin et al
ORDER adopting Magistrate Judge Jerome T. Kearney's partial Proposed Findings and Recommended Disposition with one clarification; and dismissing Duncan's claims against Holladay, and the verbal abuse claims against Martin and Clarke, are therefore dismissed without prejudice. Signed by Judge D. P. Marshall Jr. on 5/16/11. (hph)
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS
RICHARD JERMAIN DUNCAN,
ADC # 654375
Case No. 4:10-cv-2046-DPM-JTK
E. MARTIN, JR.; G. CLARKE;
SCRUGGS; ALDER; DOC
HOLLADAY; and RANDY
The Court has considered Magistrate Judge Jerome T. Kearney's partial
Proposed Findings and Recommended Disposition, Document No. 11, and
conducted a careful review of the record. Duncan filed a response, indicating
his agreement with Judge Kearney's recommended disposition. Having
reviewed the proposal for clear errors of fact on the face of the record, FED. R.
CIV. P. 72(b) (advisory committee notes to 1983 addition), and for legal error,
the Court adopts the proposal with one clarification. There is no "Defendant
Holloway" in this case. Document No. II, at 3 & 4. The Holloway analysis, as
Duncan acknowledges, Document No. 13, at 1, covers the claims against5heriff
Duncan's claims against Holladay, and the verbal abuse claims against
Martin and Clarke, are therefore dismissed without prejudice.
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?