McArty v. Arkansas, State of et al, No. 5:2014cv00037 - Document 22 (E.D. Ark. 2014)
Court Description: ORDER adopting 6 Proposed Findings and Recommendations in their entirety. Defendants State of Arkansas, Arkansas Department of Correction, Owens, Cook,and Jenkins are DISMISSED from this action, with prejudice, for failure to state a claim upon which relief may be granted. Plaintiff's allegations of ADC policy violations are DISMISSED for failure to state a claim upon which relief may be granted. Signed by Judge J. Leon Holmes on 6/23/2014. (ks)
Download PDF
<![CDATA[
McArty v. Arkansas, State of et al Doc. 22 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS PINE BLUFF DIVISION RANDALL T. MCARTY, ADC #101565 v. PLAINTIFF No. 5:14CV00037-JLH-JTK STATE OF ARKANSAS, 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. Defendants State of Arkansas, Arkansas Department of Correction, Owens, Cook, and Jenkins are DISMISSED from this action, with prejudice, for failure to state a claim upon which relief may be granted. 2. Plaintiff’s allegations of ADC policy violations are DISMISSED for failure to state a claim upon which relief may be granted. IT IS SO ORDERED this 23rd day of June, 2014. ___________________________________ 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.
