Morrow v. Kelley et al
ORDER ADOPTING 41 Partial Report and Recommendations; therefore, defts' 32 Motion for Summary Judgment is GRANTED IN PART AND DENIED IN PART. Signed by Judge Susan Webber Wright on 12/11/13. (vjt)
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS
PINE BLUFF DIVISION
DAVID KELLEY, Lieutenant,
Cummins Unit, ADC, et al.
The Court has reviewed the Proposed Findings and Recommended Partial
Disposition submitted by United States Magistrate Judge J. Thomas Ray. No
objections have been filed. After careful review, the Court concludes that the
Proposed Findings and Recommended Partial Disposition should be, and hereby are,
approved and adopted in their entirety as this Court's findings in all respects.
IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that:
Defendants' Motion for Summary Judgment (Doc. 32) is GRANTED IN
PART and DENIED IN PART.
Plaintiff's failure to protect, retaliation, and corrective inaction claims
against Defendants Boykin, Reed, Holstead, Ashcraft, Carter, Burgess, Kelley, May,
and Lay are DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE due to a lack of exhaustion.
Plaintiff may PROCEED with his excessive force claim against
Defendant Kelley and his free exercise of religion claim against Defendants Holstead,
Carter, and Railford, those claims having been exhausted.1
The Court CERTIFIES, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3), that an in
forma pauperis appeal from this Order would not be taken in good faith.
Dated this 11th day of December 2013.
/s/Susan Webber Wright
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
This, of course, is not a denial of summary judgment on the merits of Plaintiff’s excessive
force claim against Defendant Kelley and his free exercise of religion claim against Defendants
Holstead, Carter, and Railford.
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?