Strong v. Hobbs et al

Filing 32

ORDER ADOPTING 30 Report and Recommendations and granting Defendants' 27 Motion for Summary Judgment. The Clerk of Court shall alter the docket to reflect that Defendant "Lucky Abulimen" is properly "Lucky Abhulimen," a nd Defendant "J. McKenney" is properly "Gregory McKinney." Plaintiff's claims against Defendants Abhulimen, Hamilton and McKinney are DISMISSED with prejudice. The Court certifies that an in forma pauperis appeal from this Order would not be taken in good faith. Signed by Judge James M. Moody Jr. on 12/4/2014. (mcz)

Download PDF
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS WESTERN DIVISION AARON STRONG ADC# 123670 v. PLAINTIFF 4:13CV00663-JM-JJV RAY HOBBS, et al. DEFENDANTS ORDER The Court has reviewed the Proposed Findings and Recommended Disposition submitted by United States Magistrate Judge Joe J. Volpe. After carefully considering the objections and making a de novo review of the record, the Court concludes that the Proposed Findings and Recommended Disposition should be, and hereby are, approved and adopted in their entirety as this Court's findings in all respects. IT IS, THEREFORE, ORDERED that: 1. The Clerk of Court shall alter the docket to reflect that Defendant “Lucky Abulimen” is properly “Lucky Abhulimen.” 2. The Clerk of Court shall alter the docket to reflect that Defendant “J. McKenney” is properly “Gregory McKinney.” 3. Defendants’ Motion for Summary Judgment (Doc. No. 27) is GRANTED. 4. Plaintiff’s claims against Defendants Lucky Abhulimen, James Hamilton, and Gregory McKinney are DISMISSED with prejudice. 5. The Court certifies, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3), that an in forma pauperis appeal from this Order would not be taken in good faith. DATED this 4th day of December, 2014. _______________________________________ JAMES M. MOODY, JR. 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?