United States District Court, E.D. Arkansas, Jonesboro Division
PROPOSED FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
VOLPE, UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE.
following recommended disposition has been sent to United
States District Judge D.P. Marshall, 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.
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
1. Why the record made before the Magistrate Judge is
2. Why the evidence proffered at the hearing (if such a
hearing is granted) was not offered at the hearing before the
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.
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
Henson (“Plaintiff”) was an inmate at the
Crittenden County Detention Center at the time he filed this
action pro se pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983.
(Doc. Nos. 1, 7.) He sued Crittenden County Detective Scott
Benton, the Crittenden County Sheriff's Department, and a
Crittenden County Public Defender. (Doc. Nos. 1, 7.) His
claims against the Sheriff's Department and Public
Defender were dismissed before service, as was his
retaliation claim challenging his confinement. (Doc. No. 9.)
His unlawful arrest and detention claim against Defendant
Benton was served. (Id.) Defendant Benton has filed
a Motion for Summary Judgment. (Doc. Nos. 31-33.) Plaintiff
has not responded and the time for doing so has passed; this
matter is now ripe for a decision. After careful review, and
for the following reasons, I find Defendant's Motion for
Summary Judgment should be GRANTED and this case DISMISSED.
SUMMARY JUDGMENT STANDARD
Rule 56 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, summary
judgment is proper “if the movant shows that there is
no genuine dispute as to any material fact and the movant is
entitled to judgment as a matter of law.” Fed.R.Civ.P.
56(a). A party asserting that a fact cannot be or is
genuinely disputed must support the assertion by citing to
particular parts of materials in the record, “including
depositions, documents, electronically stored information,
affidavits or declarations, stipulations ...