Askew v. Barden et al
Frank W Askew, Jr |
Fidel Cobb, Spears, Jeremy Andrews, Emmer Branch, James Dycus, Washington, A Jenkins, Holmes, Brown and Roosevelt G Barden |
2:2019cv00042 |
April 11, 2019 |
US District Court for the Eastern District of Arkansas |
Patricia S Harris |
James M Moody |
Prison Condition: Civil Rights |
42 U.S.C. § 1983 |
Plaintiff |
Docket Report
This docket was last retrieved on April 29, 2019. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
Document Text |
---|
Filing 9 APPELLATE FILING FEE NOTICE to Plaintiff. (cmn) |
|
|
Filing 6 OBJECTIONS to #4 Proposed Findings and Recommendation by Frank W Askew, Jr. (llg) |
Filing 5 NOTICE to the Court by Frank W Askew, Jr. (ljb) |
Filing 4 PROPOSED FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATION recommending that #1 Askew's motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis be denied; that this case be dismissed without prejudice; that #3 Askew's motion for service be denied; and that Askew be given 30 days to reopen the case by paying the $400 filing and administrative fees in full and filing a Motion to Reopen. Objections due within 14 days of this Recommendation. Signed by Magistrate Judge Patricia S. Harris on 4/16/2019. (ljb) |
Filing 3 MOTION for Service by Frank W Askew, Jr. (ljb) |
Filing 2 COMPLAINT with Jury Demand against All Defendants filed by Frank W Askew, Jr. (ljb) |
Filing 1 MOTION for Leave to Proceed in forma pauperis by Frank W Askew, Jr. (ljb) |
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.