Riley et al v. Crawford et al
Filing
51
ORDER granting 45 motion for summary judgment; adopting Report and Recommendations re 49 . Signed by District Judge Scott O. Wright on 9/23/09. (Bax, Laura)
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF MISSOURI CENTRAL DIVISION
LAWRENCE SCHUSTER, Register No. 532526, Plaintiff, v. LARRY CRAWFORD, et al., Defendants.
) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )
No. 07-4075-CV-C-SOW
ORDER On August 4, 2009, United States Magistrate Judge William A. Knox recommended granting defendants' summary judgment and dismissing plaintiff's claims. The parties were advised they could file written exceptions to the recommendation, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C). The court has conducted a de novo review of the record, including plaintiff's August 31, 2009 filing. Plaintiff's filing fails to create any genuine issues of material fact that would preclude the entry of summary judgment. The issues of this case were adequately addressed in the report and recommendation. The court is persuaded that the recommendation is correct and should be adopted. Inmates who file an appeal with the United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit are required to pay the full $455.00 appellate filing fee, regardless of the outcome of the appeal. Henderson v. Norris, 129 F.3d 481, 484 (8th Cir. 1997). The filing of a notice of appeal is considered a consent by the inmate to allow prison officials to deduct an initial partial appellate filing fee and later installments from the prisoner's account. IT IS, THEREFORE, ORDERED that the Report and Recommendation of August 4, 2009, is adopted. [49] It is further
ORDERED that defendants' motion of October 14, 2008, for summary judgment is granted and plaintiff's claims are dismissed, with prejudice. [45]
/ s/ SCOTT O. WRIGHT Senior United States District Judge Dated: September 23, 2009 Kansas City, Missouri
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?