ONSTAD v. NARON, 6:12-CV-6020. (2014)
Court: District Court, W.D. Arkansas
Number: infdco20140909506
Visitors: 24
Filed: Sep. 08, 2014
Latest Update: Sep. 08, 2014
Summary: ORDER SUSAN O. HICKEY, District Judge. 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
Summary: ORDER SUSAN O. HICKEY, District Judge. 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 t..
More
ORDER
SUSAN O. HICKEY, District Judge.
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.
Source: Leagle
