Nelson v. U.S., 2:18CV00080-JM-JTK. (2019)
Court: District Court, E.D. Arkansas
Number: infdco20190308751
Visitors: 7
Filed: Mar. 07, 2019
Latest Update: Mar. 07, 2019
Summary: ORDER JAMES M. MOODY, JR. , District Judge . The Court has received proposed findings and recommendations from United States Magistrate Judge Jerome T. Kearney. After a review of those proposed findings and recommendations, and the timely objections received thereto, as well as a de novo review of the record, the Court adopts them in their entirety. Accordingly, IT IS, THEREFORE, ORDERED that: 1. The Motions for Summary Judgment filed by Defendants Wingo and Woodard (Doc. Nos. 28, 60)
Summary: ORDER JAMES M. MOODY, JR. , District Judge . The Court has received proposed findings and recommendations from United States Magistrate Judge Jerome T. Kearney. After a review of those proposed findings and recommendations, and the timely objections received thereto, as well as a de novo review of the record, the Court adopts them in their entirety. Accordingly, IT IS, THEREFORE, ORDERED that: 1. The Motions for Summary Judgment filed by Defendants Wingo and Woodard (Doc. Nos. 28, 60) a..
More
ORDER
JAMES M. MOODY, JR., District Judge.
The Court has received proposed findings and recommendations from United States Magistrate Judge Jerome T. Kearney. After a review of those proposed findings and recommendations, and the timely objections received thereto, as well as a de novo review of the record, the Court adopts them in their entirety. Accordingly,
IT IS, THEREFORE, ORDERED that:
1. The Motions for Summary Judgment filed by Defendants Wingo and Woodard (Doc. Nos. 28, 60) are GRANTED, and these two Defendants are DISMISSED without prejudice for failure to exhaust administrative remedies.
2. Plaintiff's Motion to Amend (Doc. No. 44) is DENIED.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Source: Leagle
