Jackson v. Hobbs et al
| Carl D Jackson |
| Ray Hobbs, Marvin Evans, William Straughn, Steve Outlaw, Maurice Williams, James Shipman, Kindrick Nelson, John Spears, Artie Morris, Ricky Owens, Quinton Palmer and Nicole Kelly |
| 5:2014cv00314 |
| August 20, 2014 |
| US District Court for the Eastern District of Arkansas |
| Pine Bluff Office |
| Jefferson |
| Beth Deere |
| J. Leon Holmes |
| Prison Condition |
| 42 U.S.C. ยง 1983 |
| Both |
Follow case documents by RSS
Available Case Documents
The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing
44
JUDGMENT: Consistent with the 43 Order that was entered on this day, it is considered, ordered, and adjudged that this case is hereby dismissed. Signed by Judge J. Leon Holmes on 10/14/2015. (rhm)
|
|
Filing
31
ORDER: Mr. Jackson has an opportunity to file a response opposing the motion for summary judgment. To be considered, the response must be filed within fourteen days of this Order. Also, if Mr. Jackson files a response, he must file a separate, short statement setting forth the disputed facts that he believes must be decided at a trial. Signed by Magistrate Judge Beth Deere on 4/2/2015. (jak)
|
|
Filing
21
ORDER adopting 5 Partial Recommended Disposition as this Court's findings in all respects. Carl D. Jackson's claim that defendants denied him access to his legal materials is DISMISSED, without prejudice. Signed by Judge J. Leon Holmes on 9/2/2014. (ks)
|
Use the links below to access additional information about this case on the US Court's PACER system. A subscription to PACER is required.
Access this case on the Arkansas Eastern District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System
- Search for Party Aliases
- Associated Cases
- Attorneys
- Case File Location
- Case Summary
- Docket Report
- History/Documents
- Parties
- Related Transactions
- Check Status
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
