Henson v. Foster

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS FAYETTEVILLE DIVISION JOSHUA ORSINGHER HENSON PLAINTIFF v. No. 5:21-cv-5214 DEPUTY C. FOSTER; NURSE JESSE PRINCE; NURSE SHAWNA STEPHENS DEFENDANTS ORDER The Court has received a report and recommendations (Doc. 34) from United States Magistrate Judge Christy Comstock. Plaintiff filed objections (Doc. 36). Pursuant to Defendants’ motions (Docs. 16, 19) for summary judgment, and over Plaintiff’s response in opposition (Docs.

23, 33), the Magistrate Judge recommends that all of Plaintiff’s claims be dismissed. The Court has conducted a de novo review of those portions of the report and recommendation to which Plaintiff has objected. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C). Plaintiff’s objections offer neither law nor fact requiring departure from the Magistrate Judge’s findings, which otherwise contain no clear error.1 0F The report and recommendation is ADOPTED IN ITS ENTIRETY.

IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that Plaintiff’s claims are DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE in their entirety. Plaintiff’s request to appoint counsel is DENIED AS MOOT.

Judgment will be entered accordingly.

1It is an open question in the Eighth Circuit whether medical treatment of pretrial detainees is evaluated for deliberate indifference or objective reasonableness. See Doc. 34, p. 15. The Report and Recommendation analyzed Plaintiff’s claim under a deliberate indifference standard. Id. However, because Plaintiff has failed to show “a causal connection between [his] injury and the challenged conduct,” Plaintiff is unable to recover on any theory. Young Am. Corp. v. Affiliated Comput. Servs. (ACS), Inc., 424 F.3d 840, 843 (8th Cir. 2005).

IT IS SO ORDERED this 22nd day of March, 2023. /s/P. K. Holmes, III P.K. HOLMES, III U.S. DISTRICT JUDGE