Jones v. Lassiter et al

Plaintiff: Diane Jones
Defendant: Lassiter and Chad E Davis
Case Number: 1:2011cv00067
Filed: August 8, 2011
Court: Arkansas Eastern District Court
Office: Batesville Office
County: Jackson
Presiding Judge: James M. Moody
Referring Judge: J. Thomas Ray
Nature of Suit: Prison Condition
Cause of Action: 42:1983
Jury Demanded By: Plaintiff

Available Case Documents

The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:

Date Filed#Document Text
November 8, 2012 36 Opinion or Order of the Court JUDGMENT: Pursuant to the 35 Order entered on this day, this case is dismissed without prejudice and Judgment is entered in favor of Defendants. Signed by Judge James M. Moody on 11/8/2012. (dmn)
October 3, 2012 32 Opinion or Order of the Court ORDER, the plaintiff is directed to file within 30 days, a Response to 29 MOTION for Summary Judgment filed by Chad E Davis and Linda Lassiter and a separate Statement of Disputed Facts that comply with the Fed. R. Civ. P. 56, Local Rule 56.2, a nd the instructions in this Order; Plaintiff is advised that failure to timely and properly comply with this Order may result in the Defendants' summary judgment papers being deemed admitted by Plaintiff, pursuant to Local Rule 56.1(c) or (b) the dimissal of this action, without prejudice, pursuant to Local Rule 5.5(c)(2). Signed by Magistrate Judge J. Thomas Ray on 10/03/2012. (kcs)
October 17, 2011 13 Opinion or Order of the Court ORDER approving and adopting 11 Partial Report and Recommendations. Plaintiff may PROCEED with her claim that Defendants Lassiter and Davis violated her equal protection rights in connection with her June 2011 disciplinary conviction, and all other claims are DISMISSED, WITHOUT PREJUDICE. The Clerk is directed to prepare a summons for Defendants Lassiter and Davis, and the U.S. Marshal is directed to serve the summons, Complaint, Amended Complaint, and this Order on them through the ADC Compliance Division without prepayment of fees and costs or security therefor. Signed by Judge James M. Moody on 10/17/2011. (dmn)
August 19, 2011 3 Opinion or Order of the Court ORDER directing plaintiff to file an amended complaint within 30 days of the date of this Order; directing the Clerk to forward to the Warden of the McPherson Unit a prisoner calculation sheet and this order. The Warden should complete and return th e calculation sheet to the Court within 30 days. Pltf shall submit either the $350 statutory filing fee or a properly completed application to proceed ifp within 30 days. The Clerk is directed to send to pltf an application to proceed ifp. Signed by Magistrate Judge J. Thomas Ray on 8/19/11. (kpr)

Access additional case information on PACER

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 this case: Jones v. Lassiter et al
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Plaintiff: Diane Jones
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Finance [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web [ Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Defendant: Lassiter
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Finance [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web [ Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Defendant: Chad E Davis
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Finance [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web [ Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]

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.


Why Is My Information Online?