Holloway v. Watson, 5:15-CV-00335 BSM. (2016)
Court: District Court, E.D. Arkansas
Number: infdco20160601723
Visitors: 13
Filed: May 31, 2016
Latest Update: May 31, 2016
Summary: ORDER BRIAN S. MILLER , District Judge . The recommended disposition ("RD") submitted by United States Magistrate Judge Beth Deere [Doc. No. 50] and plaintiff Winston Holloway's objections [Doc. No. 51] have been reviewed. After a review of the record, the RD is adopted with modification. The RD correctly dismisses Holloway's claims for the failure to exhaust administrative remedies because he presented no evidence suggesting prison officials impeded his ability to exhaust. Any references
Summary: ORDER BRIAN S. MILLER , District Judge . The recommended disposition ("RD") submitted by United States Magistrate Judge Beth Deere [Doc. No. 50] and plaintiff Winston Holloway's objections [Doc. No. 51] have been reviewed. After a review of the record, the RD is adopted with modification. The RD correctly dismisses Holloway's claims for the failure to exhaust administrative remedies because he presented no evidence suggesting prison officials impeded his ability to exhaust. Any references ..
More
ORDER
BRIAN S. MILLER, District Judge.
The recommended disposition ("RD") submitted by United States Magistrate Judge Beth Deere [Doc. No. 50] and plaintiff Winston Holloway's objections [Doc. No. 51] have been reviewed. After a review of the record, the RD is adopted with modification.
The RD correctly dismisses Holloway's claims for the failure to exhaust administrative remedies because he presented no evidence suggesting prison officials impeded his ability to exhaust. Any references to dismissing his claim for refusing to mail his certiorari petition are omitted, however, because granting the motion to amend his complaint [Doc. No. 41] removes that claim, and thus it no longer exists for summary judgment purposes. See Doc. No. 50 at 2 (dismissing claim with prejudice); but see id. at 6 (dismissing same claim without prejudice).
Accordingly, the motion for summary judgment [Doc. No. 43] is granted, and Holloway's amended complaint is dismissed without prejudice. It is certified that an in forma pauperis appeal would not be taken in good faith. See 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3).
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Source: Leagle
