Elawyers Elawyers
Ohio| Change

STEWART v. CONRAD, 5:11CV00179 JMM. (2012)

Court: District Court, E.D. Arkansas Number: infdco20120425c11 Visitors: 9
Filed: Apr. 24, 2012
Latest Update: Apr. 24, 2012
Summary: ORDER JAMES M. MOODY, District Judge. The Court has reviewed the Proposed Findings and Recommended Disposition submitted by United States Magistrate Judge H. David Young, and the Plaintiff's Motion for Court to Revisit Plaintiffs Motions (Docket # 135) and Plaintiff's Motion for Filed Copy (Docket # 136). After carefully considering the objections and making a de novo review of the record in this case, the Court concludes that the Proposed Findings and Recommended Disposition should be, and
More

ORDER

JAMES M. MOODY, District Judge.

The Court has reviewed the Proposed Findings and Recommended Disposition submitted by United States Magistrate Judge H. David Young, and the Plaintiff's Motion for Court to Revisit Plaintiffs Motions (Docket # 135) and Plaintiff's Motion for Filed Copy (Docket # 136). After carefully considering the objections and making a de novo review of the record in this case, the Court concludes that the Proposed Findings and Recommended Disposition should be, and hereby are, approved and adopted in their entirety as this Court's findings in all respects.

IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED THAT:

1. Plaintiff's motion to voluntarily dismiss his claims against certain Defendants (docket entry #118) is GRANTED, and Plaintiff's claims regarding mail interference, retaliation, and conspiracy against Defendants Charles Freyder, Sedrick Franklin, Lasaundra Malone, Nelson, Jarad Byers, Keith Waddle, Minnie Drayer, Justine Minor, Larry Norris, John Blankenship, Wendy Kelley, Ronald Dobbs, and Barbara Smallwood, are DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE.

2. Plaintiff's Complaint is DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE in all other respects for failure to introduce sufficient evidence to create a fact issue to be submitted to a jury. Accordingly, Plaintiff's Motion for Court to Revisit (Docket # 135) is DENIED.

3. Plaintiff's Motion for Filed Copy (Docket # 136) is DENIED. This Order verifies to the Plaintiff that the Court received Plaintiff's Motions on April 23, 2012.

3. All other pending motions are DENIED AS MOOT.

Source:  Leagle

Can't find what you're looking for?

Post a free question on our public forum.
Ask a Question
Search for lawyers by practice areas.
Find a Lawyer