Paul Kinloch Holmes III

“IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that the motion to dismiss (Doc. 23) is DENIED.”

“IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that Defendant Schell & Kampeter, Inc. d/b/a Diamond Pet Foods's motion to dismiss (Doc. 16) is DENIED.”

“IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that Nationwide's motion (Doc. 31) for summary judgment is GRANTED IN PART and DENIED IN PART. Southbrooke's Texas statutory claims are DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE. Southbrooke's breach of contract claim, including its demand under Ark. Code Ann. 23-79-208, remains pending for trial.”

“IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Southbrooke's motion (Doc. 34) to exclude expert testimony is TERMINATED AS MOOT.”

FLSA/AMWA unpaid-overtime case. PATTERN (strong signal, but no party motion ruled on): after denying approval of a settlement the Court found to be 'the product of collusion', Holmes ordered the parties to show cause why SJ should not be entered for the plaintiff, then granted SJ to the plaintiff SUA SPONTE for $2.00 ($1 wages + $1 liquidated damages), holding the parties may not compromise a non-bona-fide FLSA-coverage dispute (citing D.A. Schulte v. Gangi). Recorded as an order read; excluded from party-motion stats because the SJ was entered on the Court's own initiative.

In a pro se prisoner suit, Holmes adopted Magistrate Judge Mark E. Ford's R&R over the plaintiff's objections and dismissed sua sponte under Rule 41(b) for failure to prosecute and comply with court orders. The plaintiff had not responded to the defense summary-judgment motion despite an extension, but the court did not reach that motion.

“IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that Defendants’ motion (Doc. 11) to dismiss and compel arbitration is GRANTED. The parties are ORDERED to submit this dispute to arbitration consistent with the terms of their arbitration agreement, and Plaintiffs’ claims are DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE.”

“IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that Plaintiff Anthony Freeman’s motion to compel (Doc. 35) is DENIED without prejudice. The parties are directed to meet and confer in good faith regarding the issues raised therein, in light of the Court’s order earlier today granting in part and denying in part Mr. Freeman’s motion for certification.”

“The parties seek protection of confidential, sensitive, or proprietary information. For the reasons set forth below, the Court will GRANT the motion and enter a revised protective order.”

“IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that Fort Smith HMA, LLC’s motion (Doc. 109) for summary judgment is GRANTED, and all claims against Defendant Fort Smith HMA, LLC are DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE.”

“IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Dr. Horan’s motion (Doc. 112) for summary judgment and Dr. Mwanza’s motion (Doc. 102) for summary judgment are DENIED. Plaintiff’s medical malpractice claims against these two defendants remain pending for trial.”

“IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that Plaintiff’s motion to remand (Doc. 6) is DENIED.”

“IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Kia’s motions for summary judgment (Doc. 78), to exclude expert Kelly Kennett (Doc. 84), and to exclude expert Chris Caruso (Doc. 85) are DENIED. Advocacy Trust’s claims remain pending for trial.”

“IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that Kia’s motion (Doc. 81) for partial summary judgment on Advocacy Trust’s claim for punitive damages is GRANTED.”

“IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that Plaintiff’s motion (Doc. 13) for a temporary restraining order and preliminary injunction is DENIED IN PART. A ruling on Plaintiff’s motion for a preliminary injunction will be deferred until the proper Defendants have had the opportunity to respond.”