Hamilton v. Reed et al, No. 2:2016cv00126 - Document 9 (E.D. Ark. 2016)
Court Description: ORDER adopting in their entirety the 4 proposed findings and recommendations; dismissing plaintiff's complaint against defendants for failure to state a claim upon which relief may be granted; and certifying that an in forma pauperis appeal f rom this Order and accompanying Judgment dismissing this action would not be in good faith. This dismissal constitutes a "strike" within the meaning of the PLRA. An appropriate Judgment will accompany this Order. Signed by Judge J. Leon Holmes on 10/31/2016. (ljb)
Download PDF
<![CDATA[
Hamilton v. Reed et al Doc. 9 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS EASTERN DIVISION RONALD HAMILTON, ADC #133523 v. PLAINTIFF No. 2:16CV00126-JLH-JTK D. REED, et al. DEFENDANTS ORDER The Court has received proposed findings and recommendations from United States Magistrate Judge Jerome T. Kearney. After a review of those proposed findings and recommendations, and the timely objections received thereto, as well as a de novo review of the record, the Court adopts them in their entirety. Accordingly, IT IS, THEREFORE, ORDERED that: 1. Plaintiff’s complaint against defendants is DISMISSED for failure to state a claim upon which relief may be granted. 2. This dismissal constitutes a “strike” within the meaning of the PLRA. 3. The Court certifies that an in forma pauperis appeal from this Order and accompanying Judgment dismissing this action would not be in good faith, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3). An appropriate Judgment will accompany this Order. IT IS SO ORDERED this 31st day of October, 2016. __________________________________ J. LEON HOLMES 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.
