Jackson v. Tanzy et al
Earl Jackson |
Does 1-10 and Robert Tanzy |
2:2018cv00151 |
October 29, 2018 |
US District Court for the Eastern District of Arkansas |
James M Moody |
Joe J Volpe |
Prison Condition: Civil Rights |
42 U.S.C. ยง 1983 |
Plaintiff |
Docket Report
This docket was last retrieved on July 15, 2019. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
Document Text |
---|
Filing 4 OBJECTION to #3 Proposed Findings and Recommendations by Earl Jackson. (ljb) |
Filing 3 PROPOSED FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS that Plaintiff's complaint be dismissed without prejudice #1 . The Court certify, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 1915(a)(3), that an in forma pauperis appeal from any order adopting this recommendation and the accompanying judgment would not be taken in good faith. Objections due no later than 14 days from the date of the findings and recommendations. Signed by Magistrate Judge Joe J. Volpe on 11/30/2018. (lej) |
Filing 2 ORDER that Plaintiff must submit either (1) the statutory filing fee of $400; or (2) a properly completed Application to Proceed Without Prepayment of Fees and Affidavit, with the required calculation sheet signed by an authorized official of the detention center at which he is confined, within 30 days of the date of this order. Signed by Magistrate Judge Joe J. Volpe on 10/30/2018. (lej) |
Filing 1 COMPLAINT with Jury Demand against All Defendants, filed by Earl Jackson.(kdr) |
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 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.