Rodriguez v. Page et al, No. 1:2015cv00022 - Document 116 (E.D. Ark. 2017)
Court Description: ORDER adopting in their entirety the 112 proposed findings and recommendations; granting the 82 motion for summary judgment submitted by defendants Brenda Bridgeman and Melvin Nance; granting the 85 motion for summary judgment submitted by defendants Joseph Page and Aundrea Weekly; dismissing with prejudice Rodriguez's complaint; and certifying that an in forma pauperis appeal would not be taken in good faith. Signed by Chief Judge Brian S. Miller on 7/14/2017. (ljb)
Download PDF
<![CDATA[
Rodriguez v. Page et al Doc. 116 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS NORTHERN DIVISION JUAN CARLOS RODRIGUEZ ADC #156405 v. PLAINTIFF CASE NO. 1:15-CV-00022 BSM JOSEPH PAGE, et al. DEFENDANTS ORDER The proposed findings and recommendations [Doc. No. 112] submitted by United States Magistrate Judge Patricia S. Harris have been received as well as plaintiff Juan Carlos Rodriguez’s objection [Doc. No. 115] thereto. After de novo review, the proposed findings and recommendations are adopted in their entirety. Accordingly, the motion for summary judgment submitted by defendants Brenda Bridgeman and Melvin Nance [Doc. No. 82] is granted, the motion for summary judgment submitted by defendants Joseph Page and Aundrea Weekly [Doc. No. 85] is granted, and Rodrigeuz’s complaint is dismissed with prejudice. It is further 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 this 14th day of July 2017. UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE Dockets.Justia.com
]]>
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You
should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google
Privacy Policy and
Terms of Service apply.
