Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change

Marshall v. Higgins, 4:19-CV-629-DPM-BD. (2020)

Court: District Court, E.D. Arkansas Number: infdco20200317755 Visitors: 8
Filed: Feb. 18, 2020
Latest Update: Feb. 18, 2020
Summary: RECOMMENDED DISPOSITION BETH DEERE , Magistrate Judge . I. Procedure for Filing Objections This Recommendation for dismissal has been sent to Chief Judge D.P. Marshall Jr. Any party may file written objections with the Clerk of Court if they disagree with the findings or conclusions set out in the Recommendation. Objections should be specific and should include the factual or legal basis for the objection. To be considered, objections must be filed within 14 days. Parties who do not
More

RECOMMENDED DISPOSITION

I. Procedure for Filing Objections

This Recommendation for dismissal has been sent to Chief Judge D.P. Marshall Jr. Any party may file written objections with the Clerk of Court if they disagree with the findings or conclusions set out in the Recommendation. Objections should be specific and should include the factual or legal basis for the objection.

To be considered, objections must be filed within 14 days. Parties who do not file objections risk waiving their right to appeal questions of fact. And, if no objections are filed, Chief Judge Marshall can adopt this Recommendation without independently reviewing the record.

II. Discussion

Michael Marshall filed this civil rights lawsuit without the help of a lawyer, complaining that he was denied adequate nutrition while detained in the Pulaski County Detention Center. (Docket entries #2, #6, #9) On January 16, 2020, Defendants moved for a Court order compelling Mr. Martin to respond to discovery requests. (#26) The same day, the Court granted the motion and ordered Mr. Marshall to file his responses to the Defendants' discovery requests within 30 days. (#28) The Court cautioned him that his failure to file responses, as ordered, would likely result in the dismissal of his claims, without prejudice. Local Rule 5.5(c). To date, Mr. Marshall has not filed discovery responses, and the time for doing so has passed.

III. Conclusion

The Court recommends that Mr. Marshall's claims be DISMISSED, without prejudice, based on his failure to comply with this Court's January 16, 2020 Order and his failure to prosecute this lawsuit.

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