Bunn v. Norris et al

Filing 7

ORDER adopting the recommended disposition 4 in its entirety that pltf's complt be dismissed w/o prej for failure to state an actionable claim; dismissal of this action shall count as a "STRIKE" for purposes of 28 USC 1915(g). Signed by Judge Susan Webber Wright on 1/17/06. (vjt)

Bunn v. Norris et al

Doc. 7

Case 5:06-cv-00002-SWW

Document 7

Filed 01/17/2006

Page 1 of 2

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS PINE BLUFF DIVISION

GEORGE ARTHUR BUNN ADC # 112142 V. 5:06CV00002 SWW/HDY

PLAINTIFF

LARRY NORRIS, Director, Arkansas Department of Correction; JACOB K. KING; BROWN, Lieutenant, Arkansas Department of Correction; CHRIS COODY; DALE REED, Warden, Arkansas Department of Correction; JAMES GIBSON, Hearing Administrator, Arkansas Department of Correction; and JOHN AND JANE DOES 1-3 DEFENDANTS ORDER The Court has reviewed the Proposed Findings and Recommended Disposition submitted by United States Magistrate Judge H. David Young and Plaintiff's objections. After carefully considering Plaintiff's objections and making a de novo review of the record in this case, 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. This action is DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE, and dismissal of this action shall counts as a "strike" for purposes of 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g).1

Title 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g) provides that: "In no event shall a prisoner bring a civil action or appeal a judgment in a civil action under this section if the prisoner has, on 3 or more prior occasions, while incarcerated or detained in any facility, brought an action or appeal in a court of the United States that was dismissed on the grounds that it is frivolous, malicious, or fails to state a claim upon which relief may be granted . . . ." The Eighth Circuit has held that, if a plaintiff fails to exhaust available administrative remedies before initiating an action in federal court, the complaint fails to state a claim upon which relief may be granted. Porter v. Fox, 99

1

Dockets.Justia.com

Case 5:06-cv-00002-SWW

Document 7

Filed 01/17/2006

Page 2 of 2

2. The Court certifies, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3), that an in forma pauperis appeal from any Order adopting these recommendations would not be taken in good faith. DATED this 17th day of January, 2006. /s/Susan Webber Wright UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

F.3d 271 (8th Cir. 1996); Sharps v. United States Forest Serv., 28 F.3d 815 (8th Cir. 1994).