Richardson v. Kelley et al, No. 1:2016cv00154 - Document 69 (E.D. Ark. 2019)

Court Description: ORDER adopting 56 Proposed Findings and Recommendations and denying 48 motion for default judgment. Signed by Judge Kristine G. Baker on 7/10/2019. (jbh)

Download PDF
Richardson v. Kelley et al Doc. 69 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS NORTHERN DIVISION ANGELA SCHUNCEY RICHARDSON ADC #712575 v. PLAINTIFF Case No. 1:16-cv-00154-KGB/JTK COURTNEY PORCHIA, et al. DEFENDANTS ORDER Before the Court are the Proposed Findings and Recommendations submitted by United States Magistrate Judge Jerome T. Kearney (Dkt. No. 56). No objections have been filed, and the time to file an objection has passed. Plaintiff Angela Richardson did file a notice four days after the Proposed Findings and Recommendation were docketed, which Judge Kearney construed as a motion for extension of time to serve separate defendant Alexzandria Cofield (Dkt. No. 57). The Court does not construe this notice as a timely objection to the Proposed Findings and Recommendation, although the Court has reviewed and considered the filing. After a careful review of the Proposed Findings and Recommendations, the Court concludes that the Proposed Findings and Recommendations should be, and hereby are, approved and adopted as this Court’s findings in all respects (Id.). Therefore, the Court denies plaintiff Angela Richardson’s initial motion for default judgment against Ms. Cofield based on the thenexisting service issues and return of service issues identified in the Proposed Findings and Recommendations (Dkt. Nos. 48, 56). This Order does not address nor rule on the current pending second motion for default judgment filed by Ms. Richardson against Ms. Cofield (Dkt. No. 66). That second motion remains pending. Dockets.Justia.com So ordered, this the 10th day of July 2019. _____________________________ Kristine G. Baker United States District Judge 2

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.