Cummins v. Norris et al

Filing 151

ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS 146 and dismissing defts Larry Norris, James Banks III, John Ella Marshall and David Hutchinson without prejudice; dismissing defts Ramona A. Huff, Robert Rectenwald, M.D. without prejudice and dismissing deft Sharon King with prejudice 119 122 ; and certifying that an ifp appeal would not be taken in good faith. Signed by Judge Brian S. Miller on 11/2/10. (bkp)

Download PDF
Cummins v. Norris et al Doc. 151 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS PINE BLUFF DIVISION CHARLES E. CUMMINS, ADC # 94179 v. LARRY NORRIS, et al ORDER The proposed findings and recommended disposition submitted by United States Magistrate Judge Beth Deere and the filed objections have been reviewed. After carefully considering these documents and making a de novo review of the record, it is concluded that the proposed findings and recommended disposition should be, and hereby are, approved and adopted in their entirety in all respects. IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that: 1. Defendants Larry Norris, James Banks III, John Ella Marshall, and David CASE NO. 5:09CV00221 BSM/BD DEFENDANTS PLAINTIFF Hutchinson's motion for summary judgment [Doc. No. 119] is GRANTED and all claims against these defendants are DISMISSED, WITHOUT PREJUDICE. 2. Defendants Ramona A. Huff, Robert Rectenwald, M.D., and Sharon King's motion for summary judgment [Doc. No. 122] is GRANTED and all claims against defendants Huff and Rectenwald are DISMISSED, WITHOUT PREJUDICE, while all claims against defendant King are DISMISSED, WITH PREJUDICE. 3. It is CERTIFIED, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 1915(a)(3), that an in forma pauperis Dockets.Justia.com appeal from this order would not be taken in good faith. Dated this 2nd day of November, 2010. ________________________________ UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE IT IS SO ORDERED, this day of , 2010. ________________________________ 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?