Martin v. Stieve et al, No. 5:2016cv00084 - Document 41 (E.D. Ark. 2016)
Court Description: ORDER adopting the 40 proposed findings and recommendations in their entirety; and granting in part and denying in part the 32 Motion for Partial Summary Judgment filed by Defendants Stieve and Powell. As to Defendant Stieve, the motion is deni ed in part. Plaintiff's claims against Defendant Stieve were exhausted as to the time period of June 2015 through 1/9/2016. As to Defendant Powell, the motion is granted in part. Plaintiff's claims against Defendant Powell are limited to his allegations of denial of pain medication on 8/6/2014, and from 8/24/2014 through 9/7/2014. Signed by Judge J. Leon Holmes on 9/30/2016. (ljb)
Download PDF
<![CDATA[
Martin v. Stieve et al Doc. 41 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS PINE BLUFF DIVISION EDWIN MARTIN, ADC #152137 v. PLAINTIFF No. 5:16CV00084-JLH-JTK JEFFREY STIEVE, 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. The Motion for Partial Summary Judgment filed by Defendants Stieve and Powell is DENIED in part as to Defendant Stieve. Document #32. Plaintiff’s claims against Defendant Stieve were exhausted as to the time period of June 2015, through January 9, 2016. 2. The Motion for Partial Summary Judgment filed by Defendants Stieve and Powell is GRANTED in part, as to Defendant Powell. Document #32. Plaintiff’s claims against Defendant Powell are limited to his allegations of denial of pain medication on August 6, 2014, and from August 24, 2014, through September 7, 2014. IT IS SO ORDERED this 30th day of September, 2016. _________________________________ 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.
