Morrow v. Nelson et al
Order approving and adopting 35 Findings and Recommendations in its entirety as this Court's findings in all respects; granting defendants' 23 motion for summary judgment; denying Mr. Morrow's 30 motion for adequate supplies; dismissing with prejudice this case; and certifying that an in forma pauperis appeal of this order would not be taken in good faith. Signed by Judge Kristine G. Baker on 08/12/2015. (rhm)
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS
PINE BLUFF DIVISION
Case No. 5:14-cv-00321 KGB
STEVE OUTLAW, LAKISHA LEE,
MARVIN EVANS, RAY HOBBS, and
The Court has received the Findings and Recommendation (“Recommendation”) from
Magistrate Judge H. David Young (Dkt. No. 35). On April 28, 2015, the Clerk of Court filed a
letter written by Mr. Morrow and dated April 26, 2015, wherein Mr. Morrow claims that he has
inadequate supplies to prosecute his case and indicates that he would not be able to communicate to
the Court until May 11, 2015. Mr. Morrow has not communicated to the Court since his April 26,
2015, letter. The Court construes this letter as an objection to the Recommendation’s disposition of
Mr. Morrow’s motion for adequate supplies (Dkt. No. 30). Other than the April 26, 2015, letter,
Mr. Morrow has filed no objections to the Recommendation. After careful consideration and a de
novo review of the record, the Court approves and adopts the Recommendation in its entirety as this
Court’s findings in all respects.
Therefore, the Court grants defendants’ motion for summary judgment (Dkt. No. 23) and
denies Mr. Morrow’s motion for adequate supplies (Dkt. No. 30). The Court dismisses with
prejudice this case. The Court certifies, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3), that an in forma
pauperis appeal of this Order would not be taken in good faith.
SO ORDERED this 12th 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?