Johnson v. Baker, 1:15CV00081 BSM. (2016)
Court: District Court, E.D. Arkansas
Number: infdco20160517650
Visitors: 22
Filed: May 16, 2016
Latest Update: May 16, 2016
Summary: ORDER BRIAN S. MILLER , District Judge . The proposed findings and recommended disposition ("RD") submitted by United States Magistrate Judge Joe J. Volpe have been reviewed. No objections have been filed. After careful consideration, the RD are hereby adopted in all respects. IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that: 1. The clerk correct the docket to reflect defendant "Baker" is "Clinton Baker." 2. Defendants' motion for summary judgment [Doc. No. 33] is granted and defendants Clinton Baker, Terr
Summary: ORDER BRIAN S. MILLER , District Judge . The proposed findings and recommended disposition ("RD") submitted by United States Magistrate Judge Joe J. Volpe have been reviewed. No objections have been filed. After careful consideration, the RD are hereby adopted in all respects. IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that: 1. The clerk correct the docket to reflect defendant "Baker" is "Clinton Baker." 2. Defendants' motion for summary judgment [Doc. No. 33] is granted and defendants Clinton Baker, Terri..
More
ORDER
BRIAN S. MILLER, District Judge.
The proposed findings and recommended disposition ("RD") submitted by United States Magistrate Judge Joe J. Volpe have been reviewed. No objections have been filed. After careful consideration, the RD are hereby adopted in all respects.
IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that:
1. The clerk correct the docket to reflect defendant "Baker" is "Clinton Baker."
2. Defendants' motion for summary judgment [Doc. No. 33] is granted and defendants Clinton Baker, Terrie Bannister, Banks, Raymond Naylor, and Jada Lawrence are dismissed with prejudice.
3. It is certified, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. section 1915(a)(3), that an in forma pauperis appeal from this order and the accompanying judgment would not be taken in good faith.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Source: Leagle
