Riddle v. Williamson et al

Filing 12

ORDER re 9 ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS with the exception that the Court does not adopt the recommendation that a 1915(g) strike flag be placed on the case as the case is being dismissed. Plaintiff's complaint is dismissed without prejudice, and finding as moot Plaintiff's Motion for Service and 10 Motion to Appoint Counsel. Signed by Honorable P. K. Holmes, III on March 20, 2014. (sh) Modified text on 3/20/2014 (jas).

Download PDF
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS FORT SMITH DIVISION SCOTTY WAYNE RIDDLE v. PLAINTIFF Case No. 2:14-CV-02009 JOHN ALLEN WILLIAMSON, JR.; and LAWANDA WILLIAMSON DEFENDANTS ORDER The Court has received proposed findings and recommendations (Doc. 9) from Chief United States Magistrate Judge James R. Marschewski. No objections have been filed, and the deadline for filing objections has passed. The Court has reviewed this case and, being well and sufficiently advised, finds as follows: the findings contained in the report and recommendation are sound and without clear error. The Court therefore ADOPTS the report WITH THE EXCEPTION that the Court does not adopt the recommendation that a § 1915(g) strike flag be placed on the case, since the case is being dismissed for lack of jurisdiction. Accordingly, for the reasons stated in the Magistrate’s report and recommendation, IT IS ORDERED that Plaintiff’s Complaint be DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE for lack of jurisdiction. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that all pending motions are DENIED AS MOOT. Judgment will be entered accordingly. IT IS SO ORDERED this 20th day of March, 2014. /s/P. K. Holmes, III P.K. HOLMES, III CHIEF U.S. 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?