Shelton v. USA

E.D. Arkansas

Shelton v. USA

DecidedJuly 21, 2020

Docket2:19-cv-00145

StatusUnknown

This text of Shelton v. USA (Shelton v. USA) 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.

Bluebook

Shelton v. USA, (E.D. Ark. 2020).

Pincite

Opinion

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

MONTY M. SHELTON, REG. NO. 10426-078 PLAINTIFF

v. 2:19-cv-00145-JM-JJV

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA; and SISSEL, Officer, SIS Investigations DEFENDANTS

ORDER The Court has reviewed the Recommendation submitted by United States Magistrate Judge Joe J. Volpe and Plaintiff’s objections. In his Objections, Plaintiff contends that his claim is not for property loss but instead the loss of his opportunity to earn income while in prison. Plaintiff’s claim fails with regard to property loss and the loss of income from a prison job. Inmates do not have a constitutional right to a particular prison job or classification. Sanders v. Norris, 153 F. App’x 403 (8th Cir. 2005). Further, “Arkansas does not recognize the tort of negligent infliction of emotional distress.” Dowty v. Riggs, 385 S.W.3d 117, 120–21 (Ark. 2010) (citing FMC Corp. v. Helton, 202 S.W.3d 490 (Ark. 2005); Mechs. Lumber Co. v. Smith, 752 S.W.2d 763 (1988)). After conducting a de novo review, this Court adopts the Recommendation in its entirety as its findings in all respects. IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that: 1. Defendant United States of America’s Motion to Dismiss (Doc. No. 9) is GRANTED, Plaintiff’s FTCA claim is DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE for failing to state a claim upon which relief may be granted, and Defendant United States of America is DISMISSED as a party to this lawsuit. 2. It is certified, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3), that an in forma pauperis appeal from this Order would not be taken in good faith. Dated this 21st day of July, 2020.

UL □ STA L ba JUDGE

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

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

MONTY M. SHELTON, REG. NO. 10426-078 PLAINTIFF

v. 2:19-cv-00145-JM-JJV

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA; and SISSEL, Officer, SIS Investigations DEFENDANTS

ORDER The Court has reviewed the Recommendation submitted by United States Magistrate Judge Joe J. Volpe and Plaintiff’s objections. In his Objections, Plaintiff contends that his claim is not for property loss but instead the loss of his opportunity to earn income while in prison. Plaintiff’s claim fails with regard to property loss and the loss of income from a prison job. Inmates do not have a constitutional right to a particular prison job or classification. Sanders v. Norris, 153 F. App’x 403 (8th Cir. 2005). Further, “Arkansas does not recognize the tort of negligent infliction of emotional distress.” Dowty v. Riggs, 385 S.W.3d 117, 120–21 (Ark. 2010) (citing FMC Corp. v. Helton, 202 S.W.3d 490 (Ark. 2005); Mechs. Lumber Co. v. Smith, 752 S.W.2d 763 (1988)). After conducting a de novo review, this Court adopts the Recommendation in its entirety as its findings in all respects. IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that: 1. Defendant United States of America’s Motion to Dismiss (Doc. No. 9) is GRANTED, Plaintiff’s FTCA claim is DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE for failing to state a claim upon which relief may be granted, and Defendant United States of America is DISMISSED as a party to this lawsuit. 2. It is certified, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3), that an in forma pauperis appeal from this Order would not be taken in good faith. Dated this 21st day of July, 2020.

UL □ STA L ba JUDGE

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

Shelton v. USA, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/shelton-v-usa-ared-2020.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack