Garlock v. Lockey et al, No. 2:2016cv00148 - Document 49 (E.D. Ark. 2017)

Court Description: ORDER adopting in their entirety 48 the proposed findings and recommendations; granting 21 defendants Lockey, Loveday, Cunningham, and Futrell's motion for summary judgment; dismissing, without prejudice, Garlock's claims against defend ants Lockey, Loveday, Cunningham, and Futrell, for failure to exhaust his administrative remedies; granting 33 defendant USA's motion for summary judgment; dismissing, with prejudice, Garlock's Federal Torts Claims Act claim against the USA; and certifying that an in forma pauperis would not be taken in good faith. Signed by Chief Judge Brian S. Miller on 9/28/2017. (kdr)
Download PDF
Garlock v. Lockey et al Doc. 49 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS EASTERN DIVISION EDWARD GARLOCK Reg. #25750-045 v. PLAINTIFF CASE NO. 2:16-CV-00148 BSM VIRGINIA LOCKEY, R.N., Forrest City Medium FCI; et al. DEFENDANTS ORDER The proposed findings and recommendations [Doc. No. 48] submitted by United States Magistrate Judge Joe J. Volpe have been received. Plaintiff Edward Garlock has not submitted objections. After a careful review of the record, the proposed findings and recommendations are adopted in their entirety. Accordingly, defendants Lockey, Loveday, Cunningham, and Futrell’s motion for summary judgment [Doc. No. 21] is granted; Garlock’s claims against defendants Lockey, Loveday, Cunningham, and Futrell are dismissed without prejudice for failure to exhaust his administrative remedies; defendant United States of America’s motion for summary judgment [Doc. No. 33] is granted; and Garlock’s Federal Torts Claims Act claim against the United States of America is dismissed with prejudice. Furthermore, it is 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 28th day of September 2017. _________________________________ UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE Dockets.Justia.com