Meadows v. Richardson

          PROPOSED FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

          JOE J. VOLPE, UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

         INSTRUCTIONS

         The following recommended disposition has been sent to United States District Judge James M. Moody, Jr. 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 the District Judge, you must, at the same time that you file your written objections, include the following:

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

         2. Why the evidence proffered at the 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:

Clerk, United States District Court Eastern District of Arkansas 600 West Capitol Avenue, Suite A149 Little Rock, AR 72201-3325

         DISPOSITION

         I. INTRODUCTION

         Terese Marie Meadows (“Plaintiff”) is a prisoner in the McPherson Unit of the Arkansas Department of Correction (“ADC.”) She has filed this pro se action, under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, alleging that from March to May 2017, Defendants Dr. Joseph Hughes, Director of Nursing Judy Baiza, and Medical Administrator Opal Bledsoe failed to provide her with constitutionally adequate medical care for chronic back, hip, shoulder, and knee pain.^[1] (Doc. No. 8.) She seeks monetary damages, as well as injunctive and declaratory relief. (Id.)

         Defendants have filed a Motion for Summary Judgment, contending they are entitled to judgment as a matter of law. (Doc. Nos. 71-73.) Plaintiff has not filed a Response. Thus, the matter is now ripe for a decision. After careful review, and for the following reasons, I find Defendants' Motion for Summary Judgment should be GRANTED, and Plaintiff's inadequate medical care claim against Defendants Hughes, Baiza, and Bledsoe should be DISMISSED with prejudice.

         II. SUMMARY ...