Willingham v. Dobbs et al

Filing 30

ORDER approving and adopting 13 Partial Recommended Disposition in its entirety as this Court's findings and conclusions in all respects; allowing Plaintiff to proceed with his individual-capacity claims against Defendants Strom, Dobbs, and Wilkerson alleging punishment without due process of law, retaliation for filing grievances, use of excessive force, failure to protect from that use of force, and denial of adequate medical care for his injuries; dismissing, without prejudice, all other claims; 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 7/9/2024. (ldb)

Download PDF
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS CENTRAL DIVISION CHRISTOPHER WILLINGHAM ADC #161936 v. PLAINTIFF No. 4:24-cv-00225-LPR-JJV JAMES DOBBS, et al. DEFENDANTS ORDER The Court has reviewed the Partial Recommended Disposition (PRD) submitted by United States Magistrate Judge Joe J. Volpe (Doc. 13). No objections have been filed, and the time for doing so has expired. After a de novo review of the PRD, along with careful consideration of the entire case record, the Court hereby approves and adopts the PRD in its entirety as this Court’s findings and conclusions in all respects. Accordingly, Plaintiff may proceed with his individual-capacity claims against Defendants Strom, Dobbs, and Wilkerson alleging punishment without due process of law, retaliation for filing grievances, use of excessive force, failure to protect from that use of force, and denial of adequate medical care for his injuries. All other claims are DISMISSED without prejudice.1 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. The Court also wishes to make clear that many of the claims described in the first sentence of this paragraph are being allowed through screening only out of an extreme abundance of caution. The Court would not be surprised if a strong motion to dismiss knocked out many of these claims. 1 This includes, but is by no means limited to, the failure to protect claim detailed in the carryover paragraph from pages 2–3 of the PRD. 1 IT IS SO ORDERED this 9th day of July 2024. ________________________________ LEE P. RUDOFSKY UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 2

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?