Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-ared-3_19-cv-00289/USCOURTS-ared-3_19-cv-00289-2/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 

EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS 

NORTHERN DIVISION 

JAMES JOHNSON PLAINTIFF 

V. CASE NO. 3:19-CV-289-BD 

DALE COOK, et al. DEFENDANTS 

ORDER 

 Mr. Johnson filed this civil rights lawsuit without the help of a lawyer claiming 

unconditional conditions of confinement at the Mississippi County Detention Center. 

(Docket entry #2) Recently, Mr. Johnson moved for summary judgment. (#25) 

Discovery is currently stayed. Accordingly, Defendants have not had an 

opportunity to investigate Mr. Johnson’s claims. The motion for summary judgment on 

the merits of Mr. Johnson’s claims is, therefore, DENIED, as premature. 

Meanwhile, Defendants have moved for partial summary judgment, contending 

that Mr. Johnson failed to fully exhaust his administrative remedies for some of his 

claims. (#28) Specifically, they contend that Mr. Johnson failed to file any grievances 

concerning the uncovered toilets and plumbing, rusty tables, leaking light fixtures, or 

denial of access to the kiosk system. 

Mr. Johnson may file a response opposing the motion for summary judgment, if he 

wishes. To be considered, the response must be filed within 14 days of this Order. In 

opposing the motion for summary judgment, Mr. Johnson may attach affidavits that he or 

others have signed. Because affidavits are sworn statements, they must be either 

notarized or declared under penalty of perjury (see 28 U.S.C. § 1746). Unsworn 

Case 3:19-cv-00289-BD Document 31 Filed 02/18/20 Page 1 of 2
2 

statements will not be considered in deciding the motion for partial summary judgment. 

And to be considered, an affidavit must be based on the personal knowledge of the person 

who signs it. 

The motion for summary judgment concerns only whether Mr. Johnson fully 

exhausted the grievance process regarding his claims concerning the uncovered toilets 

and plumbing, rusty tables, leaking light fixtures, and denial of access to the kiosk system 

prior to filing his complaint in this case on October 28, 2019. Mr. Johnson’s response to 

the motion, therefore, should address only whether he fully exhausted his administrative 

remedies regarding those claims before October 28 and, if not, whether there was a valid 

reason why he did not. 

 IT IS SO ORDERED, this 18th day of February, 2020. 

 ___________________________________ 

 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 

Case 3:19-cv-00289-BD Document 31 Filed 02/18/20 Page 2 of 2