Ellis v. Payne et al, No. 2:2020cv00244 - Document 8 (E.D. Ark. 2021)
Court Description: ORDER adopting 4 proposed findings and recommendations in their entirety; dismissing without prejudice 2 Complaint due to his failure to pay the filing fee; and certifying that an in forma pauperis appeal from this Order and the accompanying Judgment dismissing this action is considered frivolous and not in good faith. Signed by Judge Lee P. Rudofsky on 02/03/2021. (ajt)
Download PDF
<![CDATA[
Ellis v. Payne et al Doc. 8 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS DELTA DIVISION JERRY JAMES ELLIS ADC #078658 v. PLAINTIFF Case No. 2:20-cv-00244-LPR-JJV DEXTER PAYNE, Director, ADC, et al. DEFENDANTS ORDER The Court has received proposed findings and recommendations from United States Magistrate Judge Joe J. Volpe and Plaintiff’s objections. (Docs. 4, 6).1 After a careful and de novo review of the record, the Magistrate Judge’s proposed findings and recommendations, and Plaintiff’s objections, the Court adopts the proposed findings and recommendations in their entirety. Accordingly, Plaintiff’s Complaint (Doc. 2) is DISMISSED without prejudice due to his failure to pay the filing fee. The Court certifies pursuant to 28 U.S.C. ' 1915(a)(3) that an in forma pauperis appeal from this Order and the accompanying Judgment dismissing this action is considered frivolous and not in good faith. IT IS SO ORDERED this 3rd day of February 2021. ________________________________ LEE P. RUDOFSKY UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 1 Doc. 6 is not technically an objection to Judge Volpe’s proposed findings and recommendations. It is technically a response to Judge Volpe’s Order denying Plaintiff’s IFP application and requiring Plaintiff to submit the statutory filing fee. (Doc. 3). However, out of an abundance of caution, the Court will construe Doc. 6 as an objection to the proposed findings and recommendations. Plaintiff has not filed any other objection, and the time for doing so has passed. Dockets.Justia.com
]]>
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You
should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google
Privacy Policy and
Terms of Service apply.
