WALTON v. GARLAND COUNTY DETENTION CENTER, 6:14-cv-06035. (2015)
Court: District Court, W.D. Arkansas
Number: infdco20150327b41
Visitors: 7
Filed: Mar. 26, 2015
Latest Update: Mar. 26, 2015
Summary: ORDER ROBERT T. DAWSON , District Judge . Now on this 26th day of March 2015, there comes on for consideration the report and recommendation filed herein on February 24, 2015, by the Honorable Barry A. Bryant, United States Magistrate Judge for the Western District of Arkansas. (Doc. 14). No objections to the report and recommendation have been filed. 1 The court has reviewed this case and, being well and sufficiently advised, finds that the report and recommendation is proper and should
Summary: ORDER ROBERT T. DAWSON , District Judge . Now on this 26th day of March 2015, there comes on for consideration the report and recommendation filed herein on February 24, 2015, by the Honorable Barry A. Bryant, United States Magistrate Judge for the Western District of Arkansas. (Doc. 14). No objections to the report and recommendation have been filed. 1 The court has reviewed this case and, being well and sufficiently advised, finds that the report and recommendation is proper and should ..
More
ORDER
ROBERT T. DAWSON, District Judge.
Now on this 26th day of March 2015, there comes on for consideration the report and recommendation filed herein on February 24, 2015, by the Honorable Barry A. Bryant, United States Magistrate Judge for the Western District of Arkansas. (Doc. 14). No objections to the report and recommendation have been filed.1
The court has reviewed this case and, being well and sufficiently advised, finds that the report and recommendation is proper and should be and hereby is adopted in its entirety. Accordingly, the Defendants' Motion to Dismiss (Doc. 7) is GRANTED IN PART AND DENIED IN PART. Plaintiff's claims against the Garland County Detention Center are DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE, and Plaintiff's claims based on alleged inadequacies in the grievance procedure are DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE. As to Plaintiff's remaining claims, Defendants' Motion to Dismiss is DENIED.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
FootNotes
1. The Court notes that Plaintiff's copy of the Report and Recommendation was returned as undeliverable on March 3, 2015. The Court further notes that, after prior mailings were returned to the Court marked undeliverable, an Order was entered on February 11, 2015, directing the clerk to change Plaintiff's address to the home address he provided to the detention center when he was booked. (Doc. 13). Plaintiff has not provided the Court with any other address.
Source: Leagle
