HARRIS v. U.S., 2:13CV00123 BSM. (2014)
Court: District Court, E.D. Arkansas
Number: infdco20141028705
Visitors: 22
Filed: Oct. 21, 2014
Latest Update: Oct. 21, 2014
Summary: ORDER BRIAN S. MILLER, Chief District Judge. The proposed findings and recommendations from United States Magistrate Judge Jerome T. Kearney have been reviewed. There have been no objections. After careful consideration, it is concluded that the proposed findings and recommendations should be, an hereby are, approved and adopted in their entirety in all respect. IT IS, THEREFORE, ORDERED that: 1. Defendant's motion for summary judgment [Doc. No. 18] is denied. 2. Plaintiff's motion to exte
Summary: ORDER BRIAN S. MILLER, Chief District Judge. The proposed findings and recommendations from United States Magistrate Judge Jerome T. Kearney have been reviewed. There have been no objections. After careful consideration, it is concluded that the proposed findings and recommendations should be, an hereby are, approved and adopted in their entirety in all respect. IT IS, THEREFORE, ORDERED that: 1. Defendant's motion for summary judgment [Doc. No. 18] is denied. 2. Plaintiff's motion to exten..
More
ORDER
BRIAN S. MILLER, Chief District Judge.
The proposed findings and recommendations from United States Magistrate Judge Jerome T. Kearney have been reviewed. There have been no objections. After careful consideration, it is concluded that the proposed findings and recommendations should be, an hereby are, approved and adopted in their entirety in all respect.
IT IS, THEREFORE, ORDERED that:
1. Defendant's motion for summary judgment [Doc. No. 18] is denied.
2. Plaintiff's motion to extend time [Doc. No. 34] is denied without prejudice.
3. An attorney shall be appointed to represent plaintiff in all further proceeding in this case.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Source: Leagle
