Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Wright v. Hubbard

United States District Court, E.D. Arkansas, Northern Division

September 15, 2016

JAMES WRIGHT, ADC # 142769, Plaintiff,
v.
HUBBARD, Disciplinary Hearing Officer, Grimes Unit; et al., Defendants.

          James Wright, Plaintiff, Pro Se.

          Hubbard, Defendant, represented by Charles W. Lyford, Arkansas Attorney General's Office.

          PROPOSED FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS INSTRUCTIONS

          JOE J. VOLPE, Magistrate Judge.

         The following recommended disposition has been sent to United States District Judge J. Leon Holmes. Any party may serve and file written objections to this recommendation. Objections should be specific and should include the factual or legal basis for the objection. If the objection is to a factual finding, specifically identify that finding and the evidence that supports your objection. An original and one copy of your objections must be received in the office of the United States District Court Clerk no later than fourteen (14) days from the date of the findings and recommendations. The copy will be furnished to the opposing party. Failure to file timely objections may result in waiver of the right to appeal questions of fact.

         If you are objecting to the recommendation and also desire to submit new, different, or additional evidence, and to have a hearing for this purpose before either the District Judge or Magistrate Judge, you must, at the time you file your written objections, include the following:

         1. Why the record made before the Magistrate Judge is inadequate.

         2. Why the evidence to be proffered at the new hearing (if such a hearing is granted) was not offered at the hearing before the Magistrate Judge.

         3. The details of any testimony desired to be introduced at the new hearing in the form of an offer of proof, and a copy, or the original, of any documentary or other non-testimonial evidence desired to be introduced at the new hearing.

         From this submission, the District Judge will determine the necessity for an additional evidentiary hearing. Mail your objections and "Statement of Necessity" to:

         DISPOSITION

         Plaintiff, James Wright, is an inmate in the Arkansas Department of Correction (ADC) Varner Unit. He filed a pro se Complaint (Doc. No. 2) pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983, alleging Defendant Hubbard violated his constitutional rights. Specifically, Plaintiff argues he was not allowed to be present for his disciplinary hearing in violation of his due process rights. ( Id. )

         Defendant filed a Motion For Summary Judgment (Doc. No. 14) asserting he is entitled to summary judgment as a matter of law. Plaintiff filed a Response (Doc. No. 17) and Defendant replied (Doc. No. 18). After careful consideration of the pleadings in this case, for the following reasons, I find Defendant's Motion for Summary should be GRANTED.

         I. SUMMARY JUDGMENT STANDARD

         Under Rule 56(c) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, summary judgment is proper "if the pleadings, depositions, answers to interrogatories and admissions on file, together with the affidavits, if any, show that there is no genuine issue as to any material fact and that the moving party is entitled to a judgment as a matter of law. FED. R. CIV. P. 56(c); Celotex v. Catrett,477 U.S. 317, 321 (1986); Janis v. Bresheuvel,428 F.3d 795, 798-99 (8th Cir. 2005). Although the evidence is viewed in a light most favorable to the nonmoving party, Nooner v. Norris,594 F.3d 592, 600 (8th Cir. 2010), the non-moving party has the burden of going beyond the pleadings and, by affidavit or otherwise, producing specific facts that show that there is a genuine issue for trial. Janis, 428 F.3d at 799. A genuine issue of fact exists if the evidence is such that it ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.