Brown v. Arkansas Department of Correction et al
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
RAY HOBBS; ROGER CAMERON;
RON CHISM; OBADIAH DAVIS;
SANTRICE SHAVERS; DAVID
EBERHARD; and MARCIE JOHNSON
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
17 October 2011
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?