Roland v. Crittenden County Detention Facility, No. 3:2012cv00317 - Document 16 (E.D. Ark. 2013)
Court Description: ORDER ADOPTING 6 PROPOSED FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS. Defendant Crittenden County Detention Facility is DISMISSED because it is not a proper party subject to suit. Plaintiff's allegations of denial of worship in a quiet designated area, fa cility mismanagement, insufficient mats and blankets, opening of legal mail, and no communication with family, are DISMISSED for failure to state a claim upon which relief may be granted. Plaintiff's allegations on behalf of other inmates are DISMISSED. Signed by Judge Susan Webber Wright on 2/14/2013. (jak)
Download PDF
<![CDATA[
Roland v. Crittenden County Detention Facility Doc. 16 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS JONESBORO DIVISION MICHAEL ROLAND, * * * * * * * * * Plaintiff, v. CRITTENDEN COUNTY DETENTION FACILITY; et al. Defendants. No. 3:12-cv-00317-SWW-JJV ORDER The Court has reviewed the Proposed Findings and Partial Recommended Disposition submitted by United States Magistrate Judge Joe J. Volpe. No objections have been filed. After careful consideration, the Court concludes that the Proposed Findings and Partial Recommended Disposition should be, and hereby are, approved and adopted in their entirety as this Court's findings in all respects. IT IS, THEREFORE, ORDERED that: 1. Defendant Crittenden County Detention Facility is DISMISSED because it is not a proper party subject to suit. 2. Plaintiff’s allegations of denial of worship in a quiet designated area, facility mismanagement, insufficient mats and blankets, opening of legal mail, and no communication with family, are DISMISSED for failure to state a claim upon which relief may be granted. 3. Plaintiff’s allegations on behalf of other inmates are DISMISSED. IT IS SO ORDERED this 14th day of February 2013. /s/Susan Webber Wright 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.
