Lewis v. Holladay et al
ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS 125 pltf's motion for summary judgment is denied 73 ; defts' motion for summary judgment 102 is granted in part and denied in part; pltf's official-capacity claims against defts are dism issed with prejudice; and pltf's individual-capacity claims against defts Holladay, Speer, Hazel, Lowe, Allison, Evans, Mitchell and Stowe are dismissed with prejudice; pltf may proceed with his excessive-force claims against only defts Bennett and Seibel in their individual capacities. Signed by Judge Billy Roy Wilson on 9/17/15. (tjb)
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS
ARRON MICHAEL LEWIS
CHARLES HOLLADAY, et al.
I have reviewed the Proposed Findings and Partial Recommended Disposition submitted
by United States Magistrate Judge Jerry W. Cavaneau, and the objections filed. After carefully
considering the objections and making a de novo review of the record in this case, I adopt as my
findings in all respects the Proposed Findings and Partial Recommended Disposition in their
Accordingly, Plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment (Doc. No. 73) is DENIED; the
motion for summary judgment filed by Defendants (Doc. No. 102) is GRANTED in part and
DENIED in part; Plaintiff’s official-capacity claims against are DISMISSED WITH
PREJUDICE, and Plaintiff’s individual-capacity claims against Defendants Holladay, Speer,
Hazel, Lowe, Allison, Evans, Mitchell, and Stowe are DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE.
Plaintiff may proceed with his excessive-force claims against only Defendants Bennett
and Seibel in their individual capacities.
IT IS SO ORDERED this 17th day of September, 2015.
/s/Billy Roy Wilson
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?