Chavis v. Jones et al
ORDER adopting 14 Proposed Findings and Recommendations in their entirety. Plaintiff's amended complaint against Defendants Franks, Lindsey, Paxton, Dan Roberts, Earl Phillips, and the ADC is dismissed with prejudice for failure to state a cla im upon which relief may be granted. Defendant Jones is dismissed without prejudice. This dismissal is considered a "strike" within the meaning of the Prison Litigation Reform Act; and certifying that an in forma pauperis appeal from the Order and Judgment dismissing this action will not be taken in good faith. Signed by Judge Kristine G. Baker on 06/05/2015. (rhm) (Docket text modified on 6/5/2015 to correct the description of the document filed). (jak)
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS
Case No. 4:15-cv-00139-KGB-JTK
JONES, et al.
The Court has received the Proposed Findings and Recommendations from United States
Magistrate Judge Jerome T. Kearney (Dkt. No. 14). After a review of the Proposed Findings and
Recommendations, and the timely objections thereto (Dkt. No. 16), as well as a de novo review of
the record, the Court adopts them in their entirety. Accordingly, it is therefore ordered that:
Plaintiff’s amended complaint against defendants Franks, Lindsey Paxton, Dan
Roberts, Earl Phillips, and the Arkansas Department of Correction is dismissed with prejudice for
failure to state a claim upon which relief may be granted (Dkt. No. 12).
Defendant Jones is dismissed without prejudice.
This dismissal is considered a “strike” within the meaning of the Prison Litigation
Reform Act (“PLRA”), 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g).
The Court certifies that an in forma pauperis appeal from the Order and Judgment
dismissing this action will not be taken in good faith. 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3).
An appropriate Judgment shall accompany this Order.
SO ORDERED this the 5th day of June, 2015.
KRISTINE G. BAKER
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?