Martin v. Flud et al

Filing 41

ORDER approving and adopting 36 Proposed Findings and Recommended Disposition in its entirety as this Court's findings in all respects; granting 22 Defendant Tounzen's Motion for Partial Summary Judgment; dismissing without prejudice Mr . Martin's claims against Defendant Tounzen for failure to exhaust administrative remedies; denying as moot 37 Mr. Martin's Motion to Dismiss Party; and certifying that an in forma pauperis appeal from this Order would not be taken in good faith. Signed by Judge Lee P. Rudofsky on 04/26/2021. (ajt)

Download PDF
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS CENTRAL DIVISION ROBERT MARTIN ADC #164621 v. PLAINTIFF Case No. 4:20-cv-01361-LPR-JJV FLUD, Administrator, Lonoke County Detention Center; et al. DEFENDANTS ORDER The Court has reviewed the Proposed Findings and Recommended Disposition submitted by United States Magistrate Judge Joe J. Volpe. (Doc. 36). No objections have been filed. After a careful and de novo review of the Proposed Findings and Recommended Disposition and of the record, the Court concludes that the Proposed Findings and Recommended Disposition should be, and hereby is, approved and adopted in its entirety as this Court’s findings in all respects. IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that: 1. Defendant Tounzen’s Motion for Partial Summary Judgment (Doc. 22) is GRANTED. 2. Mr. Martin’s claims against Defendant Tounzen are DISMISSED without prejudice for failure to exhaust administrative remedies. 3. Mr. Martin’s Motion to Dismiss Party is DENIED as moot. (Doc. 37). 4. 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 26th day of April 2021. ________________________________ LEE P. RUDOFSKY 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?