SAVANT v. HUYARD, 5:13CV00257 JLH/BD. (2014)
Court: District Court, E.D. Arkansas
Number: infdco20140606a04
Visitors: 12
Filed: Jun. 05, 2014
Latest Update: Jun. 05, 2014
Summary: ORDER J. LEON HOLMES, District Judge. The Court has received a Recommended Disposition ("Recommendation") from Magistrate Judge Beth Deere. After careful review of the Recommendation, the timely objections, as well as a de novo review of the record, the Court concludes that the Recommendation should be, and hereby is, approved and adopted as this Court's findings in all respects. Lasoah Savant has submitted evidence to contradict his earlier deposition testimony in which he stated that he ha
Summary: ORDER J. LEON HOLMES, District Judge. The Court has received a Recommended Disposition ("Recommendation") from Magistrate Judge Beth Deere. After careful review of the Recommendation, the timely objections, as well as a de novo review of the record, the Court concludes that the Recommendation should be, and hereby is, approved and adopted as this Court's findings in all respects. Lasoah Savant has submitted evidence to contradict his earlier deposition testimony in which he stated that he had..
More
ORDER
J. LEON HOLMES, District Judge.
The Court has received a Recommended Disposition ("Recommendation") from Magistrate Judge Beth Deere. After careful review of the Recommendation, the timely objections, as well as a de novo review of the record, the Court concludes that the Recommendation should be, and hereby is, approved and adopted as this Court's findings in all respects. Lasoah Savant has submitted evidence to contradict his earlier deposition testimony in which he stated that he had not told Thane Huyard that he was going to file a grievance against him. It is well settled that a party cannot create a sham issue of fact in an effort to defeat summary judgment by filing an affidavit that directly contradicts his prior deposition testimony. Herring v. Canada Life Assur. Co., 207 F.3d 1026, 1030 (8th Cir. 2000). Savant has also filed a motion for leave to amend the complaint to add as a defendant a party that was previously dismissed without prejudice. It appears that permitting the amendment would be futile, so the motion is denied. All other pending motions are denied as moot.
The motions for summary judgment are GRANTED. Documents #84 and #98. Savant's claims are DISMISSED with prejudice.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Source: Leagle
