From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Biesanz v. Ferguson

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS FAYETTEVILLE DIVISION
Feb 23, 2012
Civil No. 10-5017 (W.D. Ark. Feb. 23, 2012)

Opinion

Civil No. 10-5017

02-23-2012

NOLAN SIDNEY BIESANZ, JR. PLAINTIFF v. SHERIFF KEITH FERGUSON, et al. DEFENDANTS


ORDER

Now on this 23th day of February, 2012, comes on for consideration the Report And Recommendation Of The Magistrate Judge (document #35), to which no objections have been made, and the Court, having carefully reviewed said Report And Recommendation, finds that it is sound in all respects, and that it should be adopted in toto.

IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that the Report And Recommendation Of The Magistrate Judge is adopted in toto.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that plaintiff's claims against defendants Petray and Bisbee are dismissed on motion of plaintiff.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that, for the reasons stated in the Report And Recommendation Of The Magistrate Judge, plaintiff's claims against all remaining defendants are dismissed with prejudice.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

____________

JIMM LARRY HENDREN

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE


Summaries of

Biesanz v. Ferguson

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS FAYETTEVILLE DIVISION
Feb 23, 2012
Civil No. 10-5017 (W.D. Ark. Feb. 23, 2012)
Case details for

Biesanz v. Ferguson

Case Details

Full title:NOLAN SIDNEY BIESANZ, JR. PLAINTIFF v. SHERIFF KEITH FERGUSON, et al…

Court:UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS FAYETTEVILLE DIVISION

Date published: Feb 23, 2012

Citations

Civil No. 10-5017 (W.D. Ark. Feb. 23, 2012)

Citing Cases

Smith v. Emberton

This is insufficient to state a viable constitutional claim. See e.g., Muick v. Reno, Case No. 03-1725, 2003…

Odom v. Emberton

This is insufficient to state a viable constitutional claim. See e.g., Muick v. Reno, Case No. 03-1725, 2003…