McCall v. Shock
Filing
33
ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS 23 ; the Clerk of Court is directed to change the docket sheet to show deft Shock is "Andy Shock"; deft's motion for summary judgment 19 is granted; pltf's claims against deft Shock ar e dismissed with prejudice; pltf's motion to amend response 31 is denied; the Court certifies that an in forma pauperis appeal from this Order and the accompanying Judgment would not be taken in good faith. Signed by Judge Billy Roy Wilson on 4/1/15. (tjb)
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS
WESTERN DIVISION
JAMIE SHAWN MCCALL, ADC # 610019
VS.
PLAINTIFF
NO. 4:14CV00334-BRW-JJV
ANDY SHOCK, Sheriff, Faulkner County
DEFENDANT
ORDER
The Court has reviewed the Proposed Findings and Recommended Disposition submitted
by United States Magistrate Judge Joe J. Volpe and Plaintiff’s objections. After considering
Plaintiff’s objections to the RD, response to the Motion for Summary Judgment, and objections
to Defendant’s Material Facts Not in Dispute,1 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 should change the docket to show that Defendant Shock is
appropriately Defendant “Andy Shock”;
2.
Defendant’s Motion for Summary Judgment (Doc. No. 19) is GRANTED;
3.
Plaintiff’s claims against Defendant Shock are DISMISSED with prejudice;
4.
Plaintiff’s Motion to Amend Response (Doc. No. 31) is DENIED;
5.
The Court certifies, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3), that an in forma pauperis
appeal from this Order and the accompanying Judgment would not be taken in good faith.
SO ORDERED this 1st day of April, 2015.
/s/ Billy Roy Wilson
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
1
Doc. No. 26.
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?