Haag v. Shue
ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS in its entirety. The Plaintiff's 2 Complaint is DISMISSED on the grounds that the claims are asserted against an individual who is immune from suit. Plaintiff is advised that this dismissal is considered a "strike" for purposes of the Prison Litigation Reform Act. Signed by Honorable Robert T. Dawson on April 7, 2011. (lw)
Haag v. Shue
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS FORT SMITH DIVISION RODNEY JO HAAG v. Case No. 11-2001 PLAINTIFF
DANIEL SHUE, Prosecuting Attorney, Sebastian County, Arkansas ORDER
Now on this 7th day of April, 2011, there comes on for consideration the report and recommendation filed herein on March 17, 2011, by the Honorable James R. Marschewski, United States Magistrate Judge for the Western District of Arkansas. (Doc. 8).
Also before the Court are Plaintiff's objections (doc. 9). The court has reviewed this case de novo and, being well and sufficiently advised, finds as follows: The report and
recommendation is proper and should be and hereby is adopted in its entirety. Accordingly, Plaintiff's Complaint is DISMISSED on the
grounds that the claims are asserted against an individual who is immune from suit. See 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B)(IFP action may be Plaintiff is advised that
dismissed on such grounds at any time).
this dismissal is considered a "strike" for purposes of the Prison Litigation Reform Act. IT IS SO ORDERED. 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g).
/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?