Duncan v. Martin et al

Filing 34

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

WESTERN DIVISION

RICHARD JERMAIN DUNCAN,

ADC # 654375

v.

PLAINTIFF

Case No. 4:10-cv-2046-DPM-JTK

E. MARTIN, JR.; G. CLARKE;
SCRUGGS; ALDER; DOC
HOLLADAY; and RANDY
MORGAN

DEFENDANTS

ORDER
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
Doc Holladay.
Duncan's claims against Holladay, and the verbal abuse claims against
Martin and Clarke, are therefore dismissed without prejudice.
50 Ordered.

~Y.

DOP:MarailJr. (/

United States District Judge

-2­