Summary
The United States District Court for the Western District of Arkansas adopted a magistrate judge’s Report and Recommendation and granted Defendants’ motion to dismiss the official-capacity claims. The dismissal was without prejudice under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6), while the case remained referred for further proceedings concerning the Plaintiff’s intended individual-capacity claims.
Holdings
- Because Plaintiff filed timely objections, the district court conducted de novo review of the Report and Recommendation.
- The official-capacity claims against Defendants were properly dismissed without prejudice under Rule 12(b)(6).
Questions Presented
- Whether the district court should conduct de novo review of the magistrate judge's Report and Recommendation after Plaintiff filed objections.
- Whether Defendants' Rule 12(b)(6) motion should be granted as to Plaintiff's official-capacity claims.
- Whether the official-capacity claims should be dismissed without prejudice when Plaintiff did not object to their dismissal and indicated that he intended to pursue only individual-capacity claims.
Disposition
dismissed
Cases Cited (6)
- Anderson v. Evangelical Lutheran Good Samaritan Soc'y, 308 F. Supp. 3d 1011, 1015 (N.D. Iowa 2018)(followed)
- Thompson v. Nix, 897 F.2d 356, 358-59 (8th Cir. 1990)(followed)
- Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140, 154 (1985)(followed)
- Hudson v. Gammon, 46 F.3d 785, 786 (8th Cir. 1995)(followed)
- Iqbal, 556 U.S. at 678(followed)
- Bell Atl. Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544, 555 (2007)(followed)
Cited In (0)
No citing cases on record yet.
Court Document
Open PDFLoading document…