Onstad v. Deputy Jack Naron, et al

Filing 51

ORDER granting in part and denying in part 33 re: claims (1)all official capacity claims; (2) all claims against Hill; (3) excessive force claim against Naron; and (4) deprivation of property claim. Further Sheriff Glenn is dismissed from this case . Defendant's summary judgment motion is denied as to Plaintiff's due process claim stemming from his time spent in segregation. Defendants are directed to file a supplemental motion for summary judgment with respect to the due process claim. Magistrate's Report and recommendations 50 are adopted in toto. Plaintiff's motion for summary judgment 45 is denied. Signed by Honorable Susan O. Hickey on September 8, 2014. (sh)

Download PDF
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS HOT SPRINGS DIVISION ALAN COLE ONSTAD vs. PLAINTIFF Civil No. 6:12-CV-6020 DEPUTY JACK NARON; DEPUTY TRAVIS HILL; and SHERIFF PRESTON “PEP” GLENN DEFENDANTS ORDER Before the Court is the Report and Recommendation filed August 15, 2014, by the Honorable James R. Marschewski, United States Magistrate Judge for the Western District of Arkansas. ECF No. 50. Judge Marschewski recommends that Defendant’s Motion for Summary Judgment (ECF No. 33) be granted in part and denied in part. Further Judge Marschewski recommends that Plaintiff’s Motion for Summary Judgment (ECF No. 45) be denied. No party has filed objections to the Report and Recommendation, and the time to object has passed. See 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C). Upon review, the Court adopts the Report and Recommendation in toto. Defendants’ Motion for Summary Judgment (ECF No. 33) is GRANTED IN PART and DENIED IN PART. Specifically, Defendants’ motions should be granted as to the following claims: (1) all official capacity claims; (2) all claims against Hill; (3) the excessive force claim against Naron; and (4) the deprivation of property claim. Further, Sheriff Glenn is dismissed from this case. Defendant’s summary judgment motion is denied as to Plaintiff’s due process claim stemming from his time spent in segregation. Defendants are directed to file a supplemental motion for summary judgment with respect to the due process claim. Plaintiff’s Motion for Summary Judgment (ECF No. 45) is DENIED. IT IS SO ORDERED, this 8th day of September, 2014. /s/ Susan O. Hickey Susan O. Hickey 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?