Brown v. Arkansas Department of Correction et al

Filing 49

ORDER ADOPTING 44 Partial Report and Recommendations and granting in part and denying in part 33 Motion for Summary Judgment filed by defts. Plaintiff's claims against defendants Hobbs, Cameron, Davis, Shavers, and Eberhard are dismissed without prejudice based on no exhaustion. Brown may proceed on his deliberate-indiferrence claims against Chism and Johnson, but only in their individual capacities. Signed by Judge D. P. Marshall Jr. on 10/17/11. (kpr)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS

PINE BLUFF DIVISION

DANIEL RAY BROWN

ADC #88140

v.

PLAINTIFF

No.5:10-cv-326-DPM-BD

RAY HOBBS; ROGER CAMERON;

RON CHISM; OBADIAH DAVIS;

SANTRICE SHAVERS; DAVID

EBERHARD; and MARCIE JOHNSON

DEFENDANTS

ORDER
The Court has considered Magistrate Judge Beth Deere's Partial
Recommended Disposition, Document No. 44. No one has objected. Having
reviewed the proposal for clear errors of fact on the face of the record, FED. R.
Cry. P. 72(b) (advisory committee notes to 1983 addition), and for legal error,
the Court adopts the proposal in its entirety.
The Defendants' motion for summary judgment, Document No. 33, is
granted in part and denied in part. Brown's claims against Defendants

Hobbs, Cameron, Davis, Shavers, and Eberhard are dismissed without
prejudice based on no exhaustion. Brown may proceed on his deliberateindifference claims against Chism and Johnson, but only in their individual
capacities.
So Ordered.

17 October 2011

-2­