Thornsberry v. Arkansas Department of Correction et al
| Christopher A Thornsberry |
| Arkansas Department of Correction, Carrie Granville, Streeter, Counselor, Parker and Doe |
| 2:2021cv00169 |
| December 17, 2021 |
| US District Court for the Eastern District of Arkansas |
| Patricia S Harris |
| Lee P Rudofsky |
| Prison Condition: Civil Rights |
| 42 U.S.C. ยง 1983 |
| Plaintiff |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on September 1, 2023. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Filing 4 AMENDED COMPLAINT with Jury Demand against All Defendants filed by Christopher A Thornsberry. (llg) |
Filing 3
INITIAL ORDER FOR PRO SE PRISONER PLAINTIFFS granting #1 IFP motion; directing monthly payments be made from Plaintiff's institutional account for the $350 filing fee; directing the Clerk to send a copy of this Order to the Warden of the East Arkansas Regional Unit, the ADC Trust Fund Centralization Bank Office, and the ADC Compliance Office; directing the Clerk of Court to send a blank 1983 complaint form to Thornsberry; and directing Thornsberry to amend his complaint. Signed by Magistrate Judge Patricia S. Harris on 12/28/2021. (llg)
|
| Filing 2 COMPLAINT with Jury Demand against All Defendants, filed by Christopher A Thornsberry.(kdr) |
| Filing 1 MOTION for Leave to Proceed in forma pauperis by Christopher A Thornsberry. (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.
