From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Rodriguez v. Courtney

United States District Court, E.D. Arkansas, Pine Bluff Division
Apr 13, 2009
NO: 5:09CV00063 BSM (E.D. Ark. Apr. 13, 2009)

Opinion

NO: 5:09CV00063 BSM.

April 13, 2009


ORDER


The court has reviewed the Proposed Findings and Recommended Disposition submitted by United States Magistrate Judge H. David Young, and the objections filed. The Magistrate Judge recommended dismissal because plaintiff's claim is barred by the statute of limitations.

Plaintiff has filed objections, alleging that the statute should be tolled because he was unable to complete the grievance process. In light of plaintiff's objections, the court rejects the proposed findings and recommended disposition of the Magistrate Judge and refers the case back to the Magistrate Judge for further proceedings. See Williams v. Pulaski County Det. Facility, 278 Fed. Appx. 695 (8th Cir. 2008) (remanding case to determine whether limitations should have been tolled when inmate argued that he had not received final decision on his administrative grievance).


Summaries of

Rodriguez v. Courtney

United States District Court, E.D. Arkansas, Pine Bluff Division
Apr 13, 2009
NO: 5:09CV00063 BSM (E.D. Ark. Apr. 13, 2009)
Case details for

Rodriguez v. Courtney

Case Details

Full title:MANUEL RODRIGUEZ ADC #128041 PLAINTIFF v. TAMMY COURTNEY DEFENDANT

Court:United States District Court, E.D. Arkansas, Pine Bluff Division

Date published: Apr 13, 2009

Citations

NO: 5:09CV00063 BSM (E.D. Ark. Apr. 13, 2009)