Everett v. Jackson

Opinion

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS NORTHERN DIVISION

CHRISTOPHER EVERETT ADC #152664 PLAINTIFF

v. No. 3:20-cv-259-DPM-JTK

FOSTER, Corporal C Shift, NCU; REVERA, Corporal, NCU; and ETHAN PORTOR, Sergeant, NCU DEFENDANTS

ORDER On de novo review, the Court adopts Magistrate Judge Kearney’s partial recommendation, Doc. 50, as modified and overrules Defendants’ objections, Doc. 51-1. Everett’s declaration is a sudden revision, but not a wholly unexplained one. Wilson v. Westinghouse Electrical Corp., 838 F.2d 286, 289 (8th Cir. 1988). And “district courts must exercise extreme care not to take genuine issues of fact away from juries[.]” Ibid. Defendants’ motion for summary judgment, Doc. 42, is therefore denied. The modification: the denial is without prejudice. Given the timing of Everett’s declaration, Defendants may move to reopen discovery and depose Everett again if they wish to do so. Any motion to reopen is due by 17 September 2021. If no motion is filed, then the Court asks that Magistrate Judge Kearney appoint counsel for Everett and notify the Court that this case is ready to be set for trial. So Ordered.

D.P. Marshall Jr. United States District Judge 3 September 2021

_2-