Scott v. Burl et al
ORDER approving and adopting in their entirety 77 Proposed Findings and Recommended Disposition as this Court's findings in all respects; granting 68 defendants' motion for summary judgment; dismissing with prejudice plaintiff's r emaining claims against defendants Brown, Watson, Budnik, Bolden, Stephens, Washington, Kelley, Reed, Jackson, Harris, and Hobbs, except that his negligence claims are dismissed without prejudice; dismissing plaintiff's cause of action; and certifying that an in forma pauperis appeal from this Order adopting the recommendations and the accompanying Judgment would not be taken in good faith. Signed by Judge J. Leon Holmes on 3/12/2018. (ljb)
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS
PINE BLUFF DIVISION
DEVERICK SCOTT, ADC #131042
DANNY BURL, Warden,
Tucker Max Unit; et al.
The Court has reviewed the Proposed Findings and Recommended Disposition submitted
by United States Magistrate Judge Joe J. Volpe and plaintiff’s objections.
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. Document #77.
IT IS, THEREFORE, ORDERED that:
Defendants’ motion for summary judgment is GRANTED. Document #68.
Plaintiff’s remaining claims against defendants Brown, Watson, Budnik, Bolden,
Stephens, Washington, Kelley, Reed, Jackson, Harris, and Hobbs are DISMISSED WITH
PREJUDICE, except that his negligence claims are DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE.
Plaintiff’s cause of action is DISMISSED.
The Court certifies, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3), that an in forma pauperis
appeal from this Order adopting the recommendations and the accompanying Judgment would not
be taken in good faith.
DATED this 12th day of March, 2018.
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?