From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Brown v. Hobbs

United States District Court, E.D. Arkansas, Pine Bluff Division
Oct 17, 2011
No. 5:10-cv-326-DPM-BD (E.D. Ark. Oct. 17, 2011)

Opinion

No. 5:10-cv-326-DPM-BD.

October 17, 2011


ORDER


The Court has considered Magistrate Judge Beth Deere's Partial Recommended Disposition, Document No. 44. No one has objected. Having reviewed the proposal for clear errors of fact on the face of the record, FED. R. CIV. P. 72(b) (advisory committee notes to 1983 addition), and for legal error, the Court adopts the proposal in its entirety.

The Defendants' motion for summary judgment, Document No. 33, is granted in part and denied in part. Brown's claims against Defendants Hobbs, Cameron, Davis, Shavers, and Eberhard are dismissed without prejudice based on no exhaustion. Brown may proceed on his deliberate-indifference claims against Chism and Johnson, but only in their individual capacities.

So Ordered.


Summaries of

Brown v. Hobbs

United States District Court, E.D. Arkansas, Pine Bluff Division
Oct 17, 2011
No. 5:10-cv-326-DPM-BD (E.D. Ark. Oct. 17, 2011)
Case details for

Brown v. Hobbs

Case Details

Full title:DANIEL RAY BROWN ADC #88140 PLAINTIFF v. RAY HOBBS; ROGER CAMERON; RON…

Court:United States District Court, E.D. Arkansas, Pine Bluff Division

Date published: Oct 17, 2011

Citations

No. 5:10-cv-326-DPM-BD (E.D. Ark. Oct. 17, 2011)