Scott v. Watson et al

Filing 44

ORDER ADOPTING 42 Proposed Findings and Recommended Disposition. The Clerk of Court is to alter the docket to reflect that Defendant Miller is properly "Terry Miller." Defendants' 33 Motion for Summary Judgment is GRANTED. Plainti ff's claims against Defendants Randy Watson, Moses Jackson and Terry Miller are DISMISSED without prejudice for failure to exhaust administrative remedies. The Court certifies that an in forma pauperis appeal from this Order would not be taken in good faith. Signed by Judge James M. Moody Jr. on 1/14/2016. (mcz)

Download PDF
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS PINE BLUFF DIVISION DEVERICK SCOTT, ADC #131042 v. PLAINTIFF 5:15CV00174-JM-JJV RANDY WATSON, Warden, Varner Unit; et al. DEFENDANTS ORDER The Court has reviewed the Proposed Findings and Recommended Disposition submitted by United States Magistrate Judge Joe J. Volpe and Plaintiff’s Objections. After carefully considering the objections and making a de novo review of the record, the Court concludes that the Proposed Findings and Recommended Disposition should be, and hereby are, approved and adopted in their entirety as this Court's findings in all respects. IT IS, THEREFORE, ORDERED that: 1. The Clerk of Court alter the docket to reflect that Defendant Miller is properly “Terry Miller.” 2. Defendants’ Motion for Summary Judgment (Doc. No. 33) is GRANTED. 3. Plaintiff’s claims against Defendants Randy Watson, Moses Jackson, and Terry Miller are DISMISSED without prejudice for failure to exhaust administrative remedies. 4. 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. DATED this 14th day of January, 2016. _______________________________________ JAMES M. MOODY, JR. UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 1

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?