DAVIS v. HOBBS, 5:12CV00371 BSM. (2013)
Court: District Court, E.D. Arkansas
Number: infdco20130619886
Visitors: 8
Filed: Jun. 18, 2013
Latest Update: Jun. 18, 2013
Summary: ORDER BRIAN S. MILLER, District Judge. The recommended disposition received from Magistrate Judge Beth Deere has been reviewed, along with the filed objections. After careful review of the recommendation and the timely objections received, as well as a de novo review of the record, it is concluded that the recommendation should be, and hereby is, approved and adopted in all respects. Defendants' motion for summary judgment [Doc. No. 53] is GRANTED. Mr. Davis's due process claims are DISMIS
Summary: ORDER BRIAN S. MILLER, District Judge. The recommended disposition received from Magistrate Judge Beth Deere has been reviewed, along with the filed objections. After careful review of the recommendation and the timely objections received, as well as a de novo review of the record, it is concluded that the recommendation should be, and hereby is, approved and adopted in all respects. Defendants' motion for summary judgment [Doc. No. 53] is GRANTED. Mr. Davis's due process claims are DISMISS..
More
ORDER
BRIAN S. MILLER, District Judge.
The recommended disposition received from Magistrate Judge Beth Deere has been reviewed, along with the filed objections. After careful review of the recommendation and the timely objections received, as well as a de novo review of the record, it is concluded that the recommendation should be, and hereby is, approved and adopted in all respects.
Defendants' motion for summary judgment [Doc. No. 53] is GRANTED. Mr. Davis's due process claims are DISMISSED with prejudice. His eighth amendment claims against defendants Hobbs, Meinzer, Culclager, Page, and Stephens are DISMISSED, without prejudice, based on Mr. Davis's failure to exhaust his administrative remedies. Mr. Davis's claim that defendants Magness and Banks violated his constitutional rights by failing to properly staff the Varner Unit of the ADC is DISMISSED without prejudice. Mr. Davis's claims against defendants in their official capacities for money damages are DISMISSED with prejudice. Mr. Davis's motion for partial summary judgment [Doc. No. 20] is DENIED as moot.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Source: Leagle
