Odom v. Banks et al

Filing 46

ORDER ADOPTING PARTIAL REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS for 38 Partial Report and Recommendations; granting 16 Motion to Dismiss; and, denying as moot 33 Motion for Leave to File a Reply Brief, and 36 Motion for Protective Order. Signed by Judge D. P. Marshall Jr. on 1/12/2012. (dmn)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS

PINE BLUFF DIVISION

MICHAEL LAYNE ODOM,

ADC # 98676

v.

PLAINTIFF

No.5:11-cv-260-DPM

JIMMY BANKS, Warden, Varner Unit,

ADC; ANTWON EMSWELLER, Lt.,

Varner Unit, ADC; STEPHEN HUMPHREY,

Radiologist, Quality Mobile X-ray Services;

and DOES, Jane & John, ADC

DEFENDANTS

ORDER
Magistrate Judge H. David Young entered Proposed Findings and
Recommendations in this case, Document No. 38, to which adom objected,
Document No. 43. Having conducted a de novo review of the record, FED. R.

Cry. P. 72(b)(3), the Court adopts the partial recommended disposition as its
own. Even if Humphrey (a radiologist) made a false statement about adom's
x-ray, that alone would not violate the Constitution. Sprouse v. Babcock, 870
F.2d 450, 452 (8th Cir. 1989). More importantly, adom has not described any

actions by Humphrey sufficient to hold the radiologist liable for the alleged
wrongdoing of the named prison officials.
Humphrey's motion to dismiss, Document No. 16, is granted. Odom's
claims against Humphrey are dismissed with prejudice. Humphrey's motions
for leave to file a reply brief, Document No. 33, and for a protective order,
Document No. 36, are denied as moot.

So Ordered.

-2­