Ritchie v. Crawford County Detention Center
ORDER declining to adopt 39 Report and Recommendations; granting 41 Motion to Withdraw as Attorney and C. Burt Newell is substituted for Jacob M. Hargraves as counsel for Defendants. Plaintiff is advised that he must timely respond to Defendants' Motion for Summary Judgment, and he will receive a questionnaire from the Court to assist him in his response. Signed by Honorable Robert T. Dawson on August 12, 2009. (lw)
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS FORT SMITH DIVISION REX LEE RITCHIE v. Case No. 08-2038 PLAINTIFF
MIKE ALLEN; JEFF MARVIN; WATERDOWN; IRWIN; ALISON; CHRIS and LANGLEY ORDER
Now on this 12th day of August 2009, there comes on for consideration the report and recommendation filed on June 18, 2009, by the Honorable James R. Marschewski, United States Magistrate Judge for the Western District of Arkansas (Doc. 39). the Court are Plaintiff's objections to the Also before report and
recommendation (Doc. 43) and Defendants' Motion to Withdraw and Substitute Counsel (Doc. 41). The court has reviewed this case de novo. The report and
recommendation recommends dismissal of Plaintiff's Complaint for failure to prosecute and obey an order of the Court, specifically, by Plaintiff's failure to advise the Court of any change of address. In his objections, Plaintiff contends this failure was
due to his incarceration and has provided the Court with a current address. Accordingly, the Court declines to adopt the report and Plaintiff is advised that he must timely respond
to Defendants' Motion for Summary Judgment, and he will receive a questionnaire from the Court to assist him in his response. Defendants' Motion to Withdraw and Substitute Counsel (Doc.
AO72A (Rev. 8/82)
41) is GRANTED, and C. Burt Newell is substituted for Jacob M. Hargraves as counsel for Defendants. IT IS SO ORDERED.
/s/ Robert T. Dawson Honorable Robert T. Dawson United States District Judge
AO72A (Rev. 8/82)
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?