Opinion
4:23-cv-00923-KGB
08-26-2024
MICHAEL E. TAYLOR ADC #089651 PLAINTIFF v. BRANDON LONG, Sheriff, Stone County Sheriff Dept., et al. DEFENDANTS
ORDER
Kristine G. Baker Chief United States District Judge
Before the Court are a Recommended Disposition submitted by United States Magistrate Judge Joe J. Volpe (Dkt. No. 11) and a motion to appoint counsel and objection filed by plaintiff Michael E. Taylor (Dkt. No. 13).
Judge Volpe submitted his Recommended Disposition on November 28, 2023 (Dkt. No. 11). The Clerk of Court mailed the Recommended Disposition to Mr. Taylor, but on December 11, 2023, the mail was returned as undeliverable to Mr. Taylor at his address of record: Stone County Jail, Post Office Box 1317, Mountain View, Arkansas, 72560 (Dkt. No. 12). On December 19, 2023, Mr. Taylor filed his motion to appoint counsel and objection (Dkt. No. 13). Mr. Taylor's motion arrived from a new address: Northeast Arkansas Community Correction Center, Post Office Box 487, Osceola, Arkansas 72370 (Id., at 2). Court records indicate that, on December 19, 2024, the Clerk of Court resent to Mr. Taylor, at that new address, a copy of Judge Volpe's Recommended Disposition. This mail was not returned as undeliverable to Mr. Taylor. The Court presumes that Mr. Taylor received this mail.
The Court does not understand Mr. Taylor's motion to appoint counsel and objection to address Judge Volpe's pending Recommended Disposition. The “objection” portion of Mr. Taylor's motion to appoint counsel and objection states, in its entirety, “I want to object to any party being dismissed due to every party plays [sic] a key role in my case.” (Dkt. No. 13, at 1). Judge Volpe's Recommended Disposition does not recommend that the Court dismiss any specific party-it recommends that the Court dismiss without prejudice the entire case (Dkt. No. 11, at 4). Mr. Taylor's objection does not address the factual basis, legal reasoning, or ultimate recommendations in the Recommended Disposition.
Therefore, the Court understands that Mr. Taylor has not objected to Judge Volpe's Recommended Disposition, and the time to do so has now passed. In the alternative, if Mr. Taylor intended to object to Judge Volpe's Recommended Disposition, the Court has reviewed the record de novo and determines that Mr. Taylor advances no factual or legal argument that persuades the Court to reject the Recommended Disposition.
After careful consideration, the Court adopts the Recommended Disposition in its entirety as this Court's findings in all respects (Dkt. No. 11). Accordingly, the Court dismisses without prejudice the complaint (Dkt. No. 1). The Court denies as moot Mr. Taylor's pending motion to appoint counsel and objection (Dkt. No. 13). The Court recommends that, in the future, dismissal of this action count as a strike under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g). It is certified, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3), that an in forma pauperis appeal from this Order and accompanying Judgment would be frivolous and not taken in good faith.
It is so ordered