Slayton v. Martinez et al
Available Case Documents
The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:
|Date Filed||#||Document Text|
|February 9, 2017
JUDGMENT: Consistent with the 36 Order that was entered on this day, it is considered, ordered, and adjudged that 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 Kristine G. Baker on 02/09/2017. (rhm)
|March 15, 2016
ORDER adopting 19 Proposed Findings and Recommendations; dismissing Plaintiff's claims against defendant Ward 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 03/15/2016. (rhm)
|January 20, 2016
ORDER that within 30 days of this order's entry, Plaintiff must provide a full name for Defendant Ward and a viable address if he is able. Signed by Magistrate Judge Joe J. Volpe on 1/20/2016. (lej)
|January 6, 2016
ORDER adopting in part and denying in part 4 Proposed Findings and Recommendations. Mr. Slayton's claim against Mr. Lloyd for an alleged violation of his Fourth Amendment rights is not dismissed at this stage of the proceedings. However, Mr. Slayton's claims under the Fourth Amendment against separate defendants Martinez, Reed, and Relvas are dismissed without prejudice. Mr. Slayton's claim that his due process rights were violated because he was denied the opportunity to call witnesses at his disciplinary hearing is not dismissed at this stage of the proceedings. In all other respects, the Court adopts the Recommendations. Signed by Judge Kristine G. Baker on 01/06/2016. (rhm)
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
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?