Turpen v. Ritter et al

Filing 11

ORDER ADOPTING 10 REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS in its entirety ; denying as moot 3 Motion to Appoint Counsel ; denying as moot 6 Motion to Appoint Counsel ; denying as moot 7 Motion for Recusal. ; denying as moot 8 Motion ; granting 9 Motion to Dismiss and case is dismissed without prejudice. Signed by Honorable P. K. Holmes, III on December 9, 2011. (rw)

Download PDF
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS FORT SMITH DIVISION RANDY LOYD TURPEN v. PLAINTIFF Case No. 2:11-CV-02132 SGT. RITTER; OFFICER KREGGER; CAPTAIN CONGER; OFFICER WAGNER; OFFICER COODY; INMATE JEREMY MIMMES; OFFICER PARTAIN; NURSE CARREN; and NURSE LARRA DEFENDANTS ORDER Currently before the Court is the Report and Recommendations (Doc. 10) filed in this case on October 7, 2011, by the Honorable James R. Marschewski, Chief United States Magistrate for the Western District of Arkansas. More than fourteen (14) days have passed without objections being filed by the parties. The Court has reviewed this case 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 Motion to Dismiss (Doc. 9) is GRANTED and this case is DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(a)(2). Any other motions which remain pending in this case are DENIED AS MOOT. IT IS SO ORDERED this 9th day of December, 2011. /s/P. K. Holmes, III P.K. HOLMES, III 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?