Corzine v. Epley et al
ORDER granting motions, 9 , 12 , to Dismiss defendants and to dismiss case; adopting Report and Recommendations re 14 in toto, and defendants John Does 1-10, John Does 1-5, Robert Thomas Rogers, II, State of Arkansas, and Sheriff Robert Grudek are dismissed. Signed by Honorable Jimm Larry Hendren on February 25, 2011. (sh)
Corzine v. Epley et al
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS HARRISON DIVISION MARK CORZINE v. Civil No. 10-3033 PLAINTIFF
SHERIFF ROBERT GRUDEK and JOHN OR JANE DOES 1-10; STATE OF ARKANSAS; and PROSECUTING ATTORNEY ROBERT THOMAS ROGERS, II O R D E R Now on this 25th day of February, 2011,
consideration the following: * Carroll County Defendant Sheriff Robert Grudek's Motion
To Dismiss (document #9); * Motion To Dismiss By State Of Arkansas And Prosecuting
Attorney Robert T. Rogers, II (document #12); and * Report And Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge
(document #14). Plaintiff has made no response to the pending motions, and no objections to the Report And Recommendation, and the Court, being well and sufficiently advised, finds that the Report And
Recommendation is sound in all respects, and adopts it in toto. IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that Carroll County Defendant Sheriff Robert Grudek's Motion To Dismiss (document #9) is granted, and plaintiff's claims against Carroll County Sheriff Robert Grudek are dismissed.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Motion To Dismiss By State Of Arkansas And Prosecuting Attorney Robert T. Rogers, II (document #12) is granted, and plaintiff's claims against these defendants are dismissed. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that, there having been no showing of the identity or conduct of the John or Jane Doe defendants, and the claims against all named defendants having been dismissed, plaintiff's claims against the John and Jane Doe defendants are likewise dismissed. IT IS SO ORDERED. /s/ Jimm Larry Hendren JIMM LARRY HENDREN 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?