Eddy v. Byrd et al

Filing 7

ORDER dismissing pltf's complaint without prejudice for failure to comply with the Court's February 25, 2011 Order 3 ; judgment will be entered accordingly. Signed by Judge D. P. Marshall Jr. on 4/7/11. (vjt)

Download PDF
Eddy v. Byrd et al Doc. 7 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS WESTERN DIVISION JEREMY DANIEL EDDY ADC #148630 PLAINTIFF v. Case No. 4:11-cv-147-DPM-JTR KARL BYRD, Sheriff, Faulkner County; BOBBY BROWN, Jail Administrator, Faulkner County; GIVENS, Sergeant, Faulkner County; J.D. MALLETT, Corporal, Faulkner County; JOHN RANDALL, Captain, Faulkner; and TROY PORTER, Lieutenant, Faulkner County DEFENDANTS ORDER Jeremy Daniel Eddy, a prisoner in the Arkansas Department of Correction, filed this pro se 1983 action alleging that Defendants violated his constitutional rights while he was a prisoner in the Faulkner County Detention Center. Document No.2, at 6-8. On 25 February 2011, the Court entered an Order giving Eddy thirty days to file an amended complaint containing information necessary to complete the screening function mandated by 28 U.s.C. 1915A. Document No.3, at4. Importantly, the Court advised Eddy that the failure to timely and properly do so would result in the Dockets.Justia.com dismissal of his case without prejudice, pursuant to Local Rule 5.5(c)(2), which states that "[if] any communication from the Court to a pro se plaintiff is not responded to within thirty (30) days, the case may be dismissed without prejudice." Document No.3, at 1 n.l. Eddy has failed to comply with the Court's 25 February 2011 Order, and the time for doing so has expired. Accordingly, this case is dismissed without prejudice pursuant to Local Rule 5.5(c)(2). The Court certifies that an in forma pauperis appeal from this Order and the accompanying Judgment would not be taken in good faith. 28 U.s.C. 1915(a)(3). So Ordered. D.P. Marshall Jr. United States District Judge 7 /f;wJ ;l0/1

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?