Stricklin v. Griffin et al, No. 5:2018cv00093 - Document 16 (E.D. Ark. 2018)
Court Description: ORDER adopting in their entirety 13 the proposed findings and recommendations; dismissing without prejudice 3 6 8 Stricklin's complaint and amended complaints; counting this dismissal as a strike; denying as moot 11 Stricklin's motion for summary judgment; and certifying that an in forma pauperis appeal from this order would not be taken in good faith. Signed by Chief Judge Brian S. Miller on 10/29/2018. (kdr)
Download PDF
<![CDATA[
Stricklin v. Griffin et al Doc. 16 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS PINE BLUFF DIVISION JOSHUA STRICKLIN, ADC #138119 v. PLAINTIFF CASE NO. 5:18-CV-00093 BSM GRIFFIN, Lieutenant, et al., Cummins Unit, ADC DEFENDANTS ORDER The proposed findings and recommendations submitted by United States Magistrate Judge J. Thomas Ray [Doc. No. 13] and Joshua Stricklin’s objections [Doc. No. 15] have been reviewed. After de novo review of the record, the proposed findings and recommendations are adopted in their entirety. Accordingly, Stricklin’s complaint and two amended complaints [Doc. Nos. 3, 6, 8] are dismissed without prejudice, and Stricklin’s motion for summary judgment [Doc. No. 11] is denied as moot. The dismissal of this case shall be counted as a strike, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. section 1915(g). It is hereby certified, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. section 1915(a)(3), that an in forma pauperis appeal from this order would not be taken in good faith. IT IS SO ORDERED this 29th day of October 2018. _________________________________ 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.
