Crawford v. Peikar et al
| Jeffery L Crawford |
| C Harding, W Resto, Misty Rios, D Heuett, Timothy C Outlaw, Darlene Gallardo, Kenneth Brown, R Langley, Kavin Ward, Henein T Iskander, Brenda Hoy, Stephanie McCay, Mary Roberts, Pamela Taylor-Mustion, Kathleen Maples, Nader Peikar and Rivers Graham |
| 2:2012cv00224 |
| November 13, 2012 |
| US District Court for the Eastern District of Arkansas |
| Helena Office |
| St. Francis |
| J. Thomas Ray |
| Susan Webber Wright |
| Prison Condition: Civil Rights |
| 42 U.S.C. ยง 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights |
| 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
115
ORDER ADOPTING 112 Report and Recommendations of Magistrate Judge. Defendants' 97 Motion for Summary Judgment is GRANTED, and this case is DISMISSED, with prejudice. The Court CERTIFIES that an in forma pauperis appeal from this Order would not be taken in good faith. Signed by Judge Susan Webber Wright on 7/29/2014. (mcz)
|
|
Filing
101
ORDER denying 95 Plaintiff's Motion to Strike Interrogatories. All of the requests made in Plaintiff's Response to the 11/12/2013 Order 96 are denied. Signed by Magistrate Judge J. Thomas Ray on 01/15/2014. (kcs)
|
|
Filing
100
ORDER directing the Plaintiff to file, within 30 days, a Response to 97 MOTION to Dismiss and alternatively, for summary judgment filed by Kathleen Maples, Kenneth Brown, Michelle Wingo, Denese Heuett, Timothy C Outlaw, Nader Peikar, Darlene Gallardo, Kevin Ward, Mary Ellen Rivers-Graham, Brenda Hoy, Mary Roberts, Stephanie McCay, that comply with the Fed. R. Civ. P. 56, Local Rule 56.1, and the instructions set forth in this Order. Plaintiff is advised that the failure to timely an d properly comply with this Order will result in: (a) all of the facts in Defendants' summary judgment papers being deemed admitted by Plaintiff, pursuant to Local Rule 56.1(c); or (b) the dismissal of this action, without prejudice, pursuant to Local Rule 5.5(c)(2). Signed by Magistrate Judge J. Thomas Ray on 01/07/2014. (kcs)
|
|
Filing
88
ORDER ADOPTING 74 Partial Report and Recommendation; therefore, pltf's 65 Motion for Permanent Injunction is DENIED. Signed by Judge Susan Webber Wright on 10/17/13. (vjt)
|
|
Filing
75
ORDER denying 69 Plaintiff's Motion for Change of Venue. Signed by Magistrate Judge J. Thomas Ray on 09/03/2013. (kcs)
|
|
Filing
66
ORDER ADOPTING 63 Partial Report and Recommendations in their entirety; therefore, pltf's 55 Motion for Outside Medical Treatment, which has been construed as a Motion for a Preliminary Injunction, is DENIED. Signed by Judge Susan Webber Wright on 7/11/13. (vjt)
|
|
Filing
61
ORDER ADOPTING 58 Partial Report and Recommendations in their entirety; therefore, separate defts Rios's and Resto-Rivera's Motion to Dismiss 50 is GRANTED, and they are DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE from this lawsuit. Signed by Judge Susan Webber Wright on 6/28/13. (vjt)
|
|
Filing
8
ORDER ADOPTING 6 Partial Report and Recommendations in their entirety; therefore, Michelle Wingo is added as a deft; the U.S. Marshal is directed to serve summons, complaints 2 5 , and this Order on defts Peikar, Graham, Hoy, McCay, Roberts, Heu ett, Outlaw, Gallardo, Brown, Ward, Resto, Rios, Maples, and Wingo, and the U.S. Attorney's Office and the U.S. Attorney General, without prepayment of fees and costs; all other claims and defts are dismissed without prejudice. Signed by Judge Susan Webber Wright on 1/3/13. (vjt)
|
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.
