Hudson v. Andrews et al, No. 4:2017cv00084 - Document 8 (E.D. Ark. 2017)
Court Description: ORDER adopting 6 Proposed Findings and Recommendations. Plaintiff's Complaint against Defendants is dismissed without prejudice, for failure to state a claim upon which relief may be granted. Dismissal of this action constitutes a "stri ke" within the meaning of the Prison Litigation Reform Act (PLRA), 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g). The Court certifies that an in forma pauperis appeal from an Order and Judgment dismissing this action would not be taken in good faith. Signed by Judge Billy Roy Wilson on 4/11/2017. (mcz)
Download PDF
<![CDATA[
Hudson v. Andrews et al Doc. 8 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS WESTERN DIVISION BRIAN K. HUDSON v. PLAINTIFF 4:17CV00084-BRW-JTK ANDREWS, et al. DEFENDANTS ORDER The Court has received proposed findings and recommendations from United States Magistrate Judge Jerome T. Kearney. There have been no objections. After a review of those proposed findings and recommendations, the Court adopts them in their entirety. Accordingly, IT IS, THEREFORE, ORDERED that: 1. Plaintiff’s Complaint against Defendants is DISMISSED without prejudice, for failure to state a claim upon which relief may be granted. 2. Dismissal of this action constitutes a “strike” within the meaning of the Prison Litigation Reform Act (PLRA), 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g). 3. The Court certifies that an in forma pauperis appeal from an Order and Judgment dismissing this action would not be taken in good faith, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3). An appropriate Judgment shall accompany this Order. IT IS SO ORDERED this 11th day of April, 2017. /s/ Billy Roy Wilson UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 1 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.
