From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

London v. Dorney

United States District Court, W.D. Arkansas, Fort Smith Division
Apr 1, 2009
Case No. 07-2087 (W.D. Ark. Apr. 1, 2009)

Opinion

Case No. 07-2087.

April 1, 2009


ORDER


Now on this 1st day of April 2009, there comes on for consideration the report and recommendation filed herein on March 11, 2009, by the Honorable James R. Marschewski, United States Magistrate Judge for the Western District of Arkansas. (Doc. 54). Also before the Court are Defendants' objections (Doc. 55) and supplement thereto (Doc. 56).

The court has reviewed this case de novo and, being well and sufficiently advised, finds as follows: The report and recommendation is proper and should be and hereby is adopted in its entirety. Accordingly, Defendants' Motion for Summary Judgment (Doc. 36) is GRANTED as to Plaintiff's due process claims of a delayed initial appearance, and these claims are DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE. Defendants' Motion is DENIED as to Plaintiff's claims of interference with outgoing mail and denial of access to the Courts.

IT IS SO ORDERED.


Summaries of

London v. Dorney

United States District Court, W.D. Arkansas, Fort Smith Division
Apr 1, 2009
Case No. 07-2087 (W.D. Ark. Apr. 1, 2009)
Case details for

London v. Dorney

Case Details

Full title:LLOYD LONDON PLAINTIFF v. JIMMY DORNEY, Sheriff, Johnson County; RUTH ANN…

Court:United States District Court, W.D. Arkansas, Fort Smith Division

Date published: Apr 1, 2009

Citations

Case No. 07-2087 (W.D. Ark. Apr. 1, 2009)

Citing Cases

Martz v. Simmons

uly 28, 2008) (stating "failure to take Scott before the judge for seventeen days following the first arrest…

Georgacarakos v. Wiley

To the contrary, the warrantless seizure of an inmate's mail does not violate the Fourth Amendment if…