Pierce v. Cashion et al
ORDER APPROVING AND ADOPTING 54 PROPOSED FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS in their entirety and in all respects; granting 34 motion for summary judgment and dismissing plaintiff's claims against Cashion, May, Patrick, and West with prejudice; granting 38 motion for summary judgment and dismissing plaintiff's claims against Savoy without prejudice; dismissing plaintiff's 2 Complaint; and certifying that an in forma pauperis appeal is considered frivolous and not in good faith. Signed by Chief Judge Brian S. Miller on 10/20/2014. (rhm)
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS
PINE BLUFF DIVISION
ARTHUR E. PIERCE, II
NO: 5:13CV00219 BSM
MARK CASHION, et al.
The proposed findings and recommended disposition submitted by United States
Magistrate Judge H. David Young have been received. Plaintiff has filed objections. After
carefully considering the objections and making a de novo review of the record in this case,
it is concluded that the proposed findings and recommended disposition should be, and
hereby are, approved and adopted in their entirety and in all respects.
IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED THAT:
The motion for summary judgment filed by defendants Mark Cashion, Larry
May, Emmett Patrick, and Loretha West [Doc. No. 34] is granted, and plaintiff’s claims
against Cashion, May, Patrick, and West are dismissed with prejudice.
The motion for summary judgment filed by defendant Judith Savoy [Doc. No.
38] is granted, and plaintiff’s claims against Savoy are dismissed without prejudice.
Plaintiff’s complaint is dismissed without prejudice with respect to his claims
against Savoy, and dismissed with prejudice in all other respects.
The court certifies that an in forma pauperis appeal taken from the order and
judgment dismissing this action is considered frivolous and not in good faith.
DATED this 20th day of October, 2014.
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?