Pruitt v. Lake
Opinion
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS NORTHERN DIVISION
CHARLES PRUITT, JR. ADC #091574 PLAINTIFF
No. 3:24-cv-186-DPM-ERE
SANDRA LAKE, APN/Provider, Wellpath, North Central Unit; and MARJORIE PARROTT HALL, LPN/Health Services Administrator, Wellpath, North Central Unit DEFENDANTS
ORDER Pruitt has asked the Court to vacate its 26 June 2025 Order, Doc. 33, adopting Magistrate Judge Ervin’s recommendation to dismiss his claims against Culclager without prejudice. He also seeks leave to amend his complaint. Doc. 35. The defendants have not responded. The Court construes his request to vacate as a motion for relief under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 60(b). Broadway v. Norris, 193 F.3d 987, 989 (8th Cir. 1999). That request is denied. Pruitt points to no legal or factual errors, or any other exceptional circumstances, that warrant reconsideration. Nelson v. American Home Assurance Co., 702 F.3d 1038, 1043 (8th Cir. 2012).
Motion, Doc. 35, denied as specified. That motion will otherwise remain pending until Magistrate Judge Ervin has addressed Pruitt’s request to amend. So Ordered. [PVA AG. D.P. Marshall Jr. United States District Judge 7 August 20a5.
-2-
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Pruitt v. Lake (Pruitt v. Lake) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.