Carter v. Richardson et al
ORDER approving and adopting in their entirety 36 the findings and recommendation; granting 21 the defendants' motion for summary judgment; dismissing, without prejudice, plaintiff Stanley James Carter's complaint, and judgment will be entered for all defendants; and certifying that an in forma pauperis appeal taken from the order and judgment dismissing the action is considered frivolous and not in good faith. Signed by Judge James M. Moody Jr. on 5/25/2017. (kdr)
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS
PINE BLUFF DIVISION
STANLEY JAMES CARTER
NO. 5:16-cv-00273 JM
MICHAEL H. RICHARDSON, RANDY WATSON,
JEREMY ANDREWS, MEREDITH MCCONNELL,
WENDY KELLEY, MARK WARNER, GAYLON LAY,
and VALERIE WESTBROOK
The Court has received findings and a recommendation from Magistrate Judge Patricia S.
Harris.1 After a careful review of the findings and recommendation, the timely objections received
thereto, and a de novo review of the record, the Court concludes that the findings and
recommendation should be, and hereby are, approved and adopted in their entirety as this Court’s
findings in all respects. The defendants’ motion for summary judgment is granted. (Docket No.
21). The complaint filed by plaintiff Stanley James Carter is dismissed without prejudice, and
judgment will be entered for all of the defendants. The Court certifies that an in forma pauperis
appeal taken from the order and judgment dismissing the action is considered frivolous and not in
IT IS SO ORDERED this 25th day of May, 2017.
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
To clarify for Plaintiff, his statement in his objection that “[n]ow Defendants return with a new magistrate judge”
to rule on their motion for summary judgment is incorrect; Magistrate Judge Harris is the only magistrate who has
been assigned to this case.
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?