Everett v. Jackson
This text of Everett v. Jackson (Everett v. Jackson) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court, E.D. Arkansas primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
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-
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
Everett v. Jackson, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/everett-v-jackson-ared-2021.