Johnson v. Russell et al
Filing
7
ORDER adopting in part 5 Proposed Findings and Recommendations as this Court's findings. The Court adopts the recommendation that defendants Straughn and Byers be dismissed without prejudice but not the recommendation that A. Watts be dismiss ed. Johnson's claims against Straughn and Byers are hereby dismissed without prejudice for failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted. The Court certifies, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3), that an in formapauperis appeal from this Order would not be taken in good faith. Signed by Judge J. Leon Holmes on 5/19/2015. (ks)
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS
PINE BLUFF DIVISION
DERRICK JOHNSON, ADC #106719
v.
PLAINTIFF
No. 5:15CV00129 JLH-JJV
RUSSELL, Dentist, Cummins Unit,
Correctional Care Solutions; et al.
DEFENDANTS
ORDER
The Court has reviewed the Proposed Findings and Partial Recommended Disposition
submitted by United States Magistrate Judge Joe J. Volpe and the filed objections. After carefully
considering these documents and making a de novo review of the record in this case, the Court
concludes that the Proposed Findings and Partial Recommended Disposition should be, and hereby
are, approved and adopted in part as the Court’s findings. The Court adopts the recommendation
that defendants Straughn and Byers be dismissed without prejudice but not the recommendation that
A. Watts be dismissed. Though, as the proposed findings state, grievance responses, even denials,
do not give rise to substantive constitutional claims, and even though supervisors incur liability only
when they are personally involved in a violation or whether inaction amounts to deliberate
indifference, for screening purposes only, the Court concludes that Derrick Johnson has sufficiently
alleged a claim against A. Watts but not against Straughn and Byers. Johnson’s claims against
Straughn and Byers are hereby dismissed without prejudice for failure to state a claim upon which
relief can be granted. 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.
IT IS SO ORDERED this 19th day of May, 2015.
___________________________________
J. LEON HOLMES
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?