Henry v. Mannis

Opinion

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

CRAIG LAMONT HENRY ADC #182978 PLAINTIFF

V. No. 2:22-cv-35-DPM

JEREMIAH RICHARDS, CID Investigator, Arkansas County Department of Corrections; BUBBA SHELTON, Constable, Arkansas County Sheriff’s Department; SAM GOLDEN, Deputy Sheriff, Arkansas County Sheriff’s Department; and CODY EASON, Deputy Sheriff, Arkansas County DEFENDANTS

ORDER 1. The Court adopts Magistrate Judge Ervin’s unopposed recommendation, Doc. 54. Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b) (1983 addition to advisory committee notes). 2. Henry hasn’t stated a solid Fourth Amendment claim against Eason based on the May 2021 traffic stop. That claim will be dismissed without prejudice. Smith v. Boyd, 945 F.2d 1041, 1042-43 (8th Cir. 1991); see also 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B) (ii).

3. Richard’s,” Golden’s, and Eason’s motion for summary judgment, Doc. 47, is granted as to the claims against Richard and Golden; it is denied as moot as to the claims against Eason. 4. Shelton did not move for summary judgment. But Magistrate Judge Ervin’s recommendation put Henry on notice that — based on the undisputed material facts—the Court might grant summary judgment for Shelton for the same reasons as Richard and Golden. Doc. 54 at 5-6. Henry hasn’t responded; and the standard time to do so has passed. LOCAL RULE 7.2(b) & 56.1(d). The Court therefore grants summary judgment for Shelton on its own motion. Fed. R. Civ. P. 56(£)(3); Merechka v. Vigilant Insurance Co., 26 F.4th 776, 787 (8th Cir. 2022). + □ Recommendation, Doc. 54, adopted. Henry’s claim against Eason will be dismissed without prejudice. The motion for summary judgment, Doc. 47, is partly granted and partly denied for the reasons above. The Court grants summary judgment for Shelton sua sponte. So Ordered.

D.P. Marshall Jr. United States District Judge A Subs ZOAL

* Henry’s second amended complaint names Investigator “Richards.” Doc. 14. The correct spelling appears to be “Richard.” Doc. 47-2.

_2-