Elawyers Elawyers
Ohio| Change

Woodward v. Gibson, 5:19-cv-00007-KGB. (2020)

Court: District Court, E.D. Arkansas Number: infdco20200320557 Visitors: 20
Filed: Mar. 19, 2020
Latest Update: Mar. 19, 2020
Summary: ORDER KRISTINE G. BAKER , District Judge . Before the Court is the Recommended Disposition submitted by United States Magistrate Judge Beth Deere on April 10, 2019 (Dkt. No. 24). The relevant procedural history is as follows. On January 4, 2019, plaintiff Robert E. Woodward, proceeding pro se, filed a motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis and a complaint against defendants James Gibson, Warden of the Varner Unit of the Arkansas Department of Correction ("ADC"), and Wendy Kelley
More

ORDER

Before the Court is the Recommended Disposition submitted by United States Magistrate Judge Beth Deere on April 10, 2019 (Dkt. No. 24). The relevant procedural history is as follows. On January 4, 2019, plaintiff Robert E. Woodward, proceeding pro se, filed a motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis and a complaint against defendants James Gibson, Warden of the Varner Unit of the Arkansas Department of Correction ("ADC"), and Wendy Kelley, Director of the ADC (Dkt. Nos. 1, 2). On March 14, 2019, the parties jointly filed a motion to dismiss with prejudice (Dkt. No. 15). On March 26, 2019, Mr. Woodward filed a motion to withdraw settlement (Dkt. No. 18). On April 10, 2019, Judge Deere recommended that Mr. Woodward's motion to withdraw settlement be denied, that the joint motion to dismiss be granted, and that this case be dismissed with prejudice (Dkt. No. 24). Mr. Woodward subsequently filed a motion to amend judgment, which the Court construes as an objection to Judge Deere's Recommended Disposition (Dkt. No. 25). Mr. Woodward has also filed a reply in support of his motion to withdraw settlement, which the Court construes as an additional objection to Judge Deere's Recommended Disposition (Dkt. No. 26). After careful review of the Recommended Disposition and Mr. Woodward's objections thereto, as well as a de novo review of the record, the Court finds no reason to alter or reject Judge Deere's conclusion.

Accordingly, the Court adopts the Recommended Disposition in its entirety as this Court's findings of fact and conclusions of law (Dkt. No. 24). The Court grants the parties' joint motion to dismiss with prejudice and dismisses with prejudice Mr. Woodward's complaint (Dkt. No. 15). The Court denies as moot Mr. Woodward's motion to withdraw settlement and motion to amend judgment (Dkt. Nos. 18, 25).

It is so ordered.

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