Rodriguez v. Haynes et al

Plaintiff: Jose Arteaga Rodriguez
Defendant: Anthony Haynes and Does
Case Number: 2:2013cv00168
Filed: December 17, 2013
Court: Arkansas Eastern District Court
Office: Helena Office
County: St. Francis
Presiding Judge: Kristine G. Baker
Referring Judge: J. Thomas Ray
Nature of Suit: Prison Condition: Civil Rights
Cause of Action: 42:1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
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
February 18, 2016 111 Opinion or Order of the Court JUDGMENT: Pursuant to the 110 Order entered on this date, it is considered, ordered, and adjudged that this case is dismissed without prejudice. The relief sought is denied. The Court certifies that an in forma pauperis appeal from this Judgment would not be taken in good faith. Signed by Judge Kristine G. Baker on 02/18/2016. (rhm)
April 27, 2015 50 Opinion or Order of the Court ORDER APPROVING AND ADOPTING 29 RECOMMENDED PARTIAL DISPOSITION in its entirety as this Court's findings in all respects; granting Defendant Anthony Haynes's 15 motion to dismiss and dismissing the claims against him without prejudice; and certifying that an in forma pauperis appeal from this Order would not be taken in good faith. Signed by Judge Kristine G. Baker on 04/27/2015. (rhm)
July 31, 2014 22 Opinion or Order of the Court JUDGMENT: Pursuant to the 21 Order entered on this date, it is considered, ordered, and adjudged that this case is dismissed without prejudice. The relief sought is denied. The Court certifies that an in forma pauperis appeal from this Judgment would not be taken in good faith. Signed by Judge Kristine G. Baker on 07/31/2014. (rhm)
April 8, 2014 18 Opinion or Order of the Court ORDER directing the Plaintiff to file within 30 days a Response to 15 MOTION to Dismiss, in the alternative, Motion for Summary Judgment filed by Anthony Haynes and a separate Statement of Disputed Facts that comply with the local rules and the instructions set forth in this Order. Plaintiff is advised that the failure to timely and properly comply with this Order will result in: (a) all of the facts in Defendant's summary judgment papers being deemed admitted by Plaintiff; or (b) the dismissal of this action, without prejudice. Signed by Magistrate Judge J. Thomas Ray on 04/08/2014. (kcs)
January 28, 2014 7 Opinion or Order of the Court JUDGMENT: Pursuant to 6 Order, this case is dismissed without prejudice. Signed by Judge Kristine G. Baker on 1/28/2014. (mmd)
December 18, 2013 2 Opinion or Order of the Court INITIAL ORDER FOR pro se prisoners. Signed by Magistrate Judge J. Thomas Ray on 12/18/2013. (kcs)

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: Rodriguez v. Haynes et al
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Plaintiff: Jose Arteaga Rodriguez
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: Anthony Haynes
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: Does
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?