Croston v. Hobbs et al

Filing 50

ORDER declining 48 Partial Recommended Disposition. Croston's 47 Motion for Default Judgment against Cooksey is denied without prejudice. Motion for ruling, 49 , denied as moot. Signed by Judge D. P. Marshall Jr. on 11/20/2014. (jak)

Download PDF
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS PINE BLUFF DIVISION DETRICK D. CROSTON ADC #131172 v. PLAINTIFF No. 5:13-cv-217-DPM-BD ARTIS RAY HOBBS, Director, ADC; MARVIN EVANS, ADC; RAYMOND NAYLOR, ADC; THOMAS ROLAND, ADC; WILLIAM STRAUGHN, Maximum Security Unit, ADC; STEVE OUTLAW, Maximum Security Unit, ADC; MAURICE WILLIAMS, Maximum Security Unit, ADC; GREG SOCIA, Maximum Security Unit, ADC; RODERICK COOKSEY; MORRIS, Sergeant, Maximum Security Unit; and MARSH, Correctional Officer, Maximum Security Unit DEFENDANTS ORDER Unopposed partial recommendation, NQ 48, declined. Croston' s motion for default judgment against Cooksey, NQ 47, is denied without prejudice. Croston claims deliberate indifference, retaliation, and cruel and unusual punishment against all defendants. NQ 2. Entry of judgment against Cooksey now could create inconsistent results in this common claims/ multi-defendant case. United States ex rel. Costner v. United States, 56 Fed. Appx. 287, 288 (8th Cir. 28 Jan. 2003); Frow v. De La Vega, 82 U.S. 552, 554 (1872); see generally, lOA WRIGHT, MILLER, & KANE, FEDERAL PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE: CIVIL 3d ยง2690 (1998). Cooksey has lost standing and will not be heard in defense on liability. But any judgment should await further factual development and the other defendants' opportunity to defend themselves. An inconsistency may or may not be justified, depending on what actually happened and applicable law. Motion for ruling, Ng 49, denied as moot. So Ordered. D.P. Marshall Jr. United States District Judge -2-

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?