Green v. Singleton et al

Filing 45

JUDGMENT granting 44 Motion to Dismiss Case (CASE DISMISSED); ***Civil Case Dismissed with Prejudice; pursuant to settle agreement. Signed by Honorable Barry A. Bryant on October 10, 2014. (cnn)

Download PDF
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS TEXARKANA DIVISION LAVELL GREEN V. PLAINTIFF CIVIL NO. 4:12-cv-04037 SHERIFF JAMES SINGLETON; JOHNNY GODBOLT; SGT. VERONICA MAULDIN; SIMON AMES; KATHY FINCHER; and PIERRE SUMMERVILLE DEFENDANTS JUDGMENT Plaintiff proceeds in this matter pro se and in forma pauperis pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Plaintiff is currently incarcerated in the Arkansas Department of Corrections Cummins Unit in Grady, Arkansas. Currently before me is the Joint Motion to Dismiss. ECF No. 44. The parties have consented to the jurisdiction of a magistrate judge to conduct any and all proceedings in this case, including conducting the trial, ordering the entry of a final judgment, and conducting all postjudgment proceedings. ECF No. 19. Pursuant to this authority, I find this Motion ready for decision and issue this Judgment. Plaintiff filed his Complaint in this matter on April 23, 2012 alleging Defendants subjected him to excessive force while he was incarcerated in the Hempstead County Detention Center. ECF No. 1. On September 22, 2014, the parties filed the instant Joint Motion to Dismiss stating the parties entered into a settlement agreement, and requesting Plaintiff’s Complaint be dismissed with -1- prejudice pursuant to such settlement agreement. ECF No. 44. For the foregoing reasons, the Joint Motion to Dismiss (ECF No. 44) is GRANTED and Plaintiff’s Complaint (ECF No. 1) is DISMISSED with prejudice pursuant to the parties settlement agreement. The Clerk of the Court is DIRECTED to close this case. IT IS SO ORDERED this 10th day of October 2014. /s/ Barry A. Bryant HON. BARRY A. BRYANT UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE -2-

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?