Davis v. Cook et al
Wilfred Drexal Davis |
Sayer, Burnett, Dale Cook and McClain |
3:2019cv00365 |
December 17, 2019 |
US District Court for the Eastern District of Arkansas |
D P Marshall |
J Thomas Ray |
Prison Condition: Civil Rights |
42 U.S.C. ยง 1983 |
Plaintiff |
Docket Report
This docket was last retrieved on September 22, 2020. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
Document Text |
---|
Filing 14 Mail Returned Undeliverable as to Wilfred Drexal Davis re #13 Order adopting partial recommendation. Resent to 305 East Clark Street, Clarkton, Missouri 63837. (fjg) |
Filing 13 ORDER adopting #9 partial recommendation. Davis may proceed with his excessive force claims against Sayer and Burnett in their individual capacities. His claims against McClain and Cook are dismissed without prejudice, as are his official-capacity claims against Sayer and Burnett. Signed by Chief Judge D. P. Marshall Jr. on 1/30/2020. (jak) |
Filing 12 OBJECTION to #9 Report and Recommendations by Wilfred Drexal Davis. (kdr) |
Filing 11 MOTION for Leave to Proceed in forma pauperis by Wilfred Drexal Davis. (llg) |
Filing 10 NOTICE of Address Update by Wilfred Drexal Davis. (llg) |
Filing 9 PARTIAL RECOMMENDED DISPOSITION recommending Davis be allowed to proceed with his excessive force claims against Sergeant Sayer and Sergeant Burnett, in their individual capacity, and that service of the Complaint and Amended Complaint be ordered on them; Davis's official-capacity claims against Sayer and Burnett be dismissed with prejudice; Davis's claims against Lieutenant McClain and Sheriff Dale Cook be dismissed without prejudice; the Court certify that an in forma pauperis appeal from any Order adopting this Recommendation would not be taken in good faith #5 #2 ; Objections due within 14 days of the date of this Recommendation. Signed by Magistrate Judge J. Thomas Ray on 1/10/19. (tjb) |
Filing 8 ORDER denying as moot Plaintiff's #7 Motion for Copies; directing the Clerk to send Davis a blank free-world IFP application; directing him to file the completed form by 2/10/20; if he does not timely and properly do so, this case will be dismissed, without prejudice pursuant to Local Rule 5.5(c)(2); the Clerk is directed to mail a copy of this Order, an updated docket sheet, and the blank IFP application form, to Davis at the Crittenden County Detention Facility and at the forwarding address he provided in Document #6 . Signed by Magistrate Judge J. Thomas Ray on 1/10/20. (tjb) |
Filing 7 MOTION for Copies by Wilfred Drexal Davis. (ljb) |
Filing 6 NOTICE to the Court by Wilfred Drexal Davis. (jak) |
Filing 5 AMENDED COMPLAINT with Jury Demand against All Defendants, filed by Wilfred Drexal Davis.(jak) |
Filing 4 ORDER directing the Clerk to mail Davis a 1983 complaint form that is labeled "Amended Complaint". Davis must file within 30 days of the date of this Order an amended complaint that complies with the instructions in this Order. Signed by Magistrate Judge J. Thomas Ray on 12/18/2019. (jak) |
Filing 3 INITIAL ORDER FOR PRO SE PRISONERS granting #1 IFP motion; directing monthly payments be made from Plaintiff's institutional account for the $350 filing fee; and directing the Clerk to send a copy of this Order to the Administrator of the Crittenden County Detention Facility. Signed by Magistrate Judge J. Thomas Ray on 12/18/2019. (ajt) |
Filing 2 COMPLAINT with Jury Demand against All Defendants filed by Wilfred Drexal Davis. (llg) |
Filing 1 MOTION for Leave to Proceed in forma pauperis by Wilfred Drexal Davis. (llg) |
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.