Marshall et al v. Fordyce County Jail
ORDER ADOPTING 43 the proposed findings and recommendations; dismissing without prejudice plaintiff's 2 38 42 complaints for failure to state a claim upon which relief may be granted; denying 42 Rainey's motion to amend. Dismissal of this action constitutes a "strike" within the meaning of the Prison Litigation Reform Act. It is certified that an in forma pauperis appeal from this order and the judgment dismissing this case would not taken in good faith. Signed by Chief Judge Brian S. Miller on 6/24/2016. (kdr)
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS
PINE BLUFF DIVISION
JERRY MARSHALL, SR., ADC #97894, et al.
CASE NO. 5:16CV00062 BSM
FORDYCE COUNTY JAIL et al.
The Court proposed findings and recommendations (“RD”) submitted by United
States Magistrate Judge Jerome T. Kearney have been reviewed. There have been no
objections. After careful consideration, the RD are hereby adopted in all respects.
IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that:
Plaintiff Frederick Rainey’s complaints [Doc. Nos. 2, 38, 42] are dismissed
without prejudice for failure to state a claim upon which relief may be granted.
Rainey’s motion to amend [Doc. No. 42] is denied.
Dismissal of this action constitutes a “strike” within the meaning of the Prison
Litigation Reform Act, 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g).
It is certified that an in forma pauperis appeal from this order and the
judgment dismissing this case would not be taken in good faith. 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3).
IT IS SO ORDERED this 24th day June 2016.
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?