Jones v. Golden et al

Filing 49

ORDER re 34 MOTION to Dismiss Case as Frivolous is construed by the Court to be a motion for summary judgment. Defendants shall file a brief and any relevant evidence in support of such (including affidavits) within 20 days of the date of this Order. Plaintiff shall file a response to Defendants' filings within 15 days thereafter. Signed by Magistrate Judge Jerome T. Kearney on 7/10/13. (kpr)

Download PDF
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS PINE BLUFF DIVISION LARRY WAYNE JONES, ADC #70147 v. PLAINTIFF 5:12CV00423-JLH-JTK DARRYL GOLDEN, et al. DEFENDANTS ORDER This matter is before the Court on Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss (Doc. No. 34). Plaintiff filed a Response, Brief and Declaration, in opposition to the Motion (Doc. Nos. 46-48). In Plaintiff’s Response, he relies heavily on some answers to interrogatories filed in another lawsuit, Jones v. Conrad, et al., 5:10CV00355-BSM-JJV (Doc. No. 47, pp. 31-44). The Court considers this material as “matters outside the pleadings,” and will treat the present Motion as one for Summary Judgment, pursuant to FED.R.CIV.P. 12(d). Accordingly, IT IS, THEREFORE, ORDERED that Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss (Doc. No. 34) shall be construed as a Motion for Summary Judgment. Defendants shall file a brief, and any relevant evidence in support of such (including affidavits), within twenty days of the date of this Order. Plaintiff shall file a Response to Defendants’ filings within fifteen days thereafter. IT IS SO ORDERED this 10th day of July, 2013. ______________________________________ JEROME T. KEARNEY UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE 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?