United States District Court, E.D. Arkansas, Pine Bluff Division
November 20, 2014
DETRICK D. CROSTON, ADC #131172, Plaintiff,
ARTIS RAY HOBBS, Director, ADC; MARVIN0 EVANS, ADC; RAYMOND NAYLOR, ADC; THOMAS ROLAND, ADC; WILLIAM STRAUGHN, Maximum Security Unit, ADC; STEVE OUTLAW, Maximum Security Unit, ADC; MAURICE WILLIAMS, Maximum Security Unit, ADC; GREG SOCIA, Maximum Security Unit, ADC; RODERICK COOKSEY; MORRIS, Sergeant, Maximum Security Unit; and MARSH, Correctional Officer, Maximum Security Unit, Defendants.
D. P. MARSHALL, Jr., District Judge.
Unopposed partial recommendation, No 48, declined. Croston's motion for default judgment against Cooksey, No 47, is denied without prejudice. Croston claims deliberate indifference, retaliation, and cruel and unusual punishment against all defendants. No 2. Entry of judgment against Cooksey now could create inconsistent results in this common claims/multi-defendant case. United States ex rel. Costner v. United States, 56 Fed.Appx. 287, 288 (8th Cir. 28 Jan. 2003); Frow v. De La Vega, 82 U.S. 552, 554 (1872); see generally, lOA WRIGHT, MILLER, & KANE, FEDERAL PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE: CIVIL 3d §2690 (1998). Cooksey has lost standing and will not be heard in defense on liability. But any judgment should await further factual development and the other defendants' opportunity to defend themselves. An inconsistency may or may not be justified, depending on what actually happened and applicable law. Motion for ruling, No 49, denied as moot.