Baldwin v. Banks et al, No. 2:2018cv00071 - Document 29 (E.D. Ark. 2019)
Court Description: ORDER approving and adopting in part 21 Proposed Findings and Recommendations as this Court's findings; approving and adopting 25 Proposed Findings and Recommendations as this Court's findings; granting 19 Mr. Bank's motion to di smiss; granting 23 defendant Essie Clay's motion for judgment on the pleadings; dismissing without prejudice plaintiff Bryan Baldwin's claims against Mr. Banks; dismissing with prejudice his claims against Ms. Clay; certifying that an in forma paperis appeal from this Order adopting these recommendations would not be taken in good faith; and denying as moot 27 Ms. Clay's motion to stay discovery. Signed by Judge Kristine G. Baker on 2/14/2019. (cmn)
Download PDF
<![CDATA[
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS EASTERN DIVISION BRYAN BALDWIN v. PLAINTIFF Case No. 2:18-cv-0071-KGB-JJV OCIE BANKS, Sheriff, Lee County, et al. DEFENDANTS ORDER The Court has reviewed the two Proposed Findings and Recommendations (“Recommendations”) submitted by United States Magistrate Judge Joe J. Volpe (Dkt. Nos. 21, 25). No objections have been filed to either Recommendation, and the time to file objections has passed. After careful review, the Court concludes that the first Proposed Findings and Recommendations should be, and hereby are, approved and adopted in part as this Court’s findings (Dkt. No. 21). Judge Volpe recommends dismissing with prejudice claims against defendant Ocie Banks; the Court instead dismisses without prejudice these claims. The Court concludes that the second Proposed Findings and Recommendations should be, and hereby are, approved and adopted as this Court’s findings (Dkt. No. 25). Accordingly, the Court grants Mr. Banks’s motion to dismiss (Dkt. No. 19), and the Court grants defendant Essie Clay’s motion for judgment on the pleadings (Dkt. No. 23). The Court dismisses without prejudice plaintiff Bryan Baldwin’s claims against Mr. Banks and dismisses with prejudice his claims against Ms. Clay. The Court dismisses Mr. Baldwin’s complaint and amended complaint (Dkt. Nos. 2, 4). The Court certifies that, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3), an in forma pauperis appeal from this Order adopting these recommendations would not be taken in good faith. Also before the Court is Ms. Clay’s motion to stay discovery (Dkt. No. 27). The Court denies as moot Ms. Clay’s motion (Dkt. No. 27). So ordered this 14th day of February, 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.
