Johnson v. Hobbs et al
| Robert Singleton Johnson, Jr |
| Ray Hobbs, John Maples, Josuah Sorrells and Chad Davis |
| 1:2011cv00004 |
| January 6, 2011 |
| US District Court for the Eastern District of Arkansas |
| Batesville Office |
| Jackson |
| D. P. Marshall |
| Joe J. Volpe |
| Prison Condition |
| 42 U.S.C. ยง 1983 |
| Plaintiff |
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
54
JUDGMENT: Consistent with the Order that was entered on this day, this case is DISMISSED with prejudice. Signed by Magistrate Judge Joe J. Volpe on 02/04/2014. (rhm)
|
|
Filing
36
ORDER appointing Attorney Dale E. Adams to represent Plaintiff for the sole purpose of obtaining service for Defendant Sorrells; and directing the Clerk of the Court to send to Mr. Adams a copy of this order and Local Rule 83.7. Signed by Magistrate Judge Joe J. Volpe on 5/31/2013. (srw)
|
|
Filing
35
ORDER declining to adopt the 30 Partial Report and Recommendations. Signed by Judge Kristine G. Baker on 5/21/13. (kpr)
|
|
Filing
27
ORDER directing the Clerk of the Court to prepare a summons for Defendant Josuah Sorrrells; and directing the U.S. Marshal to serve a copy of the summons and 2 Plaintiff's Complaint on the Defendant at the address provided under seal, without prepayment of fees and costs or security therefore. Signed by Magistrate Judge Joe J. Volpe on 6/15/2012. (srw)
|
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.
