Stewart v. Murphy

Filing 46

ORDER ADOPTING 43 REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS in its entirety. Defendants' Motions 16 Motion to Dismiss and 18 Motion to Dismiss are Granted. Plaintiff's claims are Dismissed with Prejudice; Plaintiff's pending motions 27 37 38 39 40 41 are Denied as moot. Signed by Honorable Robert T. Dawson on March 11, 2015. (hnc) Modified on 3/11/2015 to edit docket text(hnc).

Download PDF
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS HOT SPRINGS DIVISION PHILLIP DEWAYNE STEWART v. PLAINTIFF Case No. 14-6077 DR. A. MURPHY, Ouachita River Unit (ORU); RAY HOBBS, Director Arkansas Department of Correction; DREAM REDIC YOUNG, Infirmary Manager, ORU; NURSE KIMBERLY KELLOGG, ORU; and NURSE RETA DOUGLAS, ORU DEFENDANTS ORDER Now on this 11th day of March 2015, there comes on for consideration the report and recommendation filed herein on February 20, 2015, by the Honorable Mark E. Ford, United States Magistrate Judge for the Western District of Arkansas. (Doc. 43). Also before the Court are Plaintiff’s objections (doc. 45). The court has reviewed this case de novo, to include thirtythree (33) pages of objections by Plaintiff. Plaintiff’s lengthy objections restated his complaints against Defendants, however, were not specifically tailored to the findings and recommendations of Judge Ford. However, they were reviewed. The Court, 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, Defendants’ Motions to Dismiss (docs. 16 & 18) are GRANTED, and Plaintiff’s AO72A (Rev. 8/82) claims are DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE. Plaintiff’s pending motions (docs. 27, 37-41) are DENIED AS MOOT. IT IS SO ORDERED. /s/ Robert T. Dawson Honorable Robert T. Dawson United States District Judge AO72A (Rev. 8/82)

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?