Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-arwd-1_05-cv-01002/USCOURTS-arwd-1_05-cv-01002-0/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 555
Nature of Suit: Prisoner - Prison Condition
Cause of Action: 42:1983 Prisoner Civil Rights

---

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

WESTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS

EL DORADO DIVISION

MICHAEL E. MONK PLAINTIFF

VS. CASE NO. 05-CV-1002

JIMMY SMITH, JOE STRICKLAND, 

OUACHITA COUNTY, ARKANSAS

PAUL LUCAS, VINCENT MILLS, 

L.C. SMITH, and CAPT. BRIAN DEFENDANTS

MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER

Before the Court is Joe Strickland, Ouachita County, Arkansas, Paul Lucas, Vincent Mills,

L.C. Smith, and Capt. Brian’s (“County Defendants”) Motion for Summary Judgment. (Doc. 49).

County Defendants assert in their motion that Ouachita County did not have an unconstitutional

policy regarding use of force at the Ouachita County Jail, and that vicarious liability may not be

imposed against them for the actions of an employee. Plaintiff Michael E. Monk has responded.

(Doc. 53-1). The Court finds the matter ripe for consideration. 

In his Response, Monk “admits that the Defendants Joe Strickland, Ouachita County,

Arkansas, Paul Lucas, Vincent Mills, L.C. Smith, and Capt. Brian should be granted summary

judgment.” (Doc. 53-1, pg. 1). The Court accepts Monk’s admission, and finds that County

Defendants’ Motion for Summary Judgment should be and hereby is GRANTED. Plaintiff Michael

Monk’s claims against County Defendants Joe Strickland, Ouachita County, Arkansas, Paul Lucas,

Vincent Mills, L.C. Smith, and Capt. Brian are hereby DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE. 

Plaintiff’s Response to County Defendants’ Motion for Summary Judgment further states,

however, that Separate Defendant Jimmy Smith, in his individual capacity, should be denied

summary judgment. The Court notes that the deadline for filing dispositive motions in this case was

Case 1:05-cv-01002-HFB Document 59 Filed 12/13/06 Page 1 of 2 PageID #: <pageID>
-2-

December 1, 2006. As of that date, Separate Defendant Jimmy Smith had not moved for summary

judgment. Accordingly, Plaintiff’s claims against Separate Defendant Jimmy Smith will proceed

to trial as scheduled. 

IT IS SO ORDERED, this 13th day of December, 2006. 

/s/Harry F. Barnes 

Hon. Harry F. Barnes 

United States District Judge

Case 1:05-cv-01002-HFB Document 59 Filed 12/13/06 Page 2 of 2 PageID #: <pageID>