Rider v. Starr et al
Order adopting 65 Partial Recommended Disposition as this Court's findings in its entirety; dismissing without prejudice Mr. Rider's claims against defendants Andrea Butler, C. Lewis, and Michelle Corbin; and granting Mr. Rider's [8 9] motion for extension of time. He shall have up to and including August 28, 2015, to file his objections to Judge Deere's 88 Partial Recommended Disposition regarding the pending 76 motion for summary judgment. Signed by Judge Kristine G. Baker on 08/10/2015. (rhm)
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS
PINE BLUFF DIVISION
LESTER EUGENE RIDER
ADC # 152530
Case No. 5:13-cv-00202-KGB-BD
RITA STARR, et al.
The Court has received a Partial Recommended Disposition filed by Magistrate Judge
Beth Deere recommending the dismissal without prejudice of plaintiff Lester Eugene Rider’s
claims against defendants Andrea Butler, C. Lewis, and Michelle Corbin (Dkt. No. 65). There
have been no objections, and the time for filing objections has passed. After careful review, the
Court concludes that the Partial Recommended Disposition should be, and hereby is, approved
and adopted as this Court’s findings in its entirety (Dkt. No. 65). The Court dismisses without
prejudice Mr. Rider’s claims against defendants Andrea Butler, C. Lewis, and Michelle Corbin.
The Court has also received a Partial Recommended Deposition from Judge Deere
regarding the motion for summary judgment filed by the ADC defendants (Dkt. No. 88). Mr.
Rider filed a motion for extension of time to file objections to this Partial Recommended
Disposition (Dkt. No. 89). The Court grants Mr. Rider’s motion (Dkt. No. 89), and he shall have
up to and including August 28, 2015, to file his objections to Judge Deere’s Partial
Recommended Disposition regarding the pending motion for summary judgment (Dkt. No. 88).
SO ORDERED this the 10th day of August, 2015.
Kristine G. Baker
United States District 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?