Hollins v. Ramsey
Plaintiff: Jamie Jubar Hollins
Defendant: Raylina Ramsey
Case Number: 3:2021cv00117
Filed: June 23, 2021
Court: US District Court for the Eastern District of Arkansas
Presiding Judge: D P Marshall
Referring Judge: Joe J Volpe
Nature of Suit: Prison Condition: Civil Rights
Cause of Action: 42 U.S.C. ยง 1983
Jury Demanded By: Defendant
Docket Report

This docket was last retrieved on November 29, 2021. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.

Date Filed Document Text
August 17, 2021 Opinion or Order Filing 18 INITIAL SCHEDULING ORDER: Discovery due by 2/17/2022. Dispositive motions due by 3/17/2022. Dispositive motions on the issue of exhaustion due by 10/18/2021. Signed by Magistrate Judge Joe J. Volpe on 8/17/2021. (lej)
August 17, 2021 Filing 17 NOTICE, CONSENT AND REFERENCE to a Magistrate Judge forwarded by the Clerk of Court. (lej)
August 16, 2021 Filing 16 ANSWER to #1 Complaint with Jury Demand by Raylina Ramsey.(Middleton, Rosalyn)
August 16, 2021 Filing 15 NOTICE of Appearance by Rosalyn L. Middleton on behalf of Raylina Ramsey (Middleton, Rosalyn)
July 21, 2021 Opinion or Order Filing 14 (This is a TEXT ENTRY ONLY. There is no pdf document associated with this entry.) ORDER denying Plaintiff's motion for subpoena #11 . The Court retains the discretion to refuse to issue Rule 45 subpoenas to nonparties if [Plaintiff] does not provide sufficient information. Simmons v. Dodson, 2016 WL 2958030 at *2 (E.D. Mo. May 23, 2016). Court's routinely assess subpoena requests pursuant to Rule 45(d)(1), which requires the subpoenaing party to avoid imposing undue burden or expense on [the] person subject to the subpoena. Here, Plaintiff's motion fails to sufficiently explain how any of the information he seeks is relevant so his request is denied. The motion to appoint counsel is denied #13 . A civil litigant does not have a constitutional or statutory right to appointed counsel in a civil action but the Court may appoint counsel at its discretion. 28 U.S.C. 1915(e)(1). The Court has considered Plaintiff's need for an attorney, the likelihood that Plaintiff will benefit from assistance of counsel, the factual complexity of the case, the Plaintiff's ability to investigate and present his case, and the complexity of the legal issues. In considering these factors, the Court finds that Plaintiff's claims do not appear legally or factually complex, and it appears he is capable of prosecuting his claims without appointed counsel. Signed by Magistrate Judge Joe J. Volpe on 7/21/2021. (lej)
July 21, 2021 Filing 13 MOTION to Appoint Counsel by Jamie Jubar Hollins. (llg)
July 21, 2021 Filing 12 AFFIDAVIT by Jamie Jubar Hollins. (llg)
July 21, 2021 Filing 11 MOTION for Subpoena by Jamie Jubar Hollins. (llg)
July 21, 2021 Filing 10 AFFIDAVIT in Support of Request to Proceed In Forma Pauperis by Jamie Jubar Hollins. (llg)
July 13, 2021 Opinion or Order Filing 9 (This is a TEXT ENTRY ONLY. There is no pdf document associated with this entry.) ORDER after careful consideration of Plaintiff's motions for order I find they should be denied #7 #8 . He seeks advisory relief that fails to satisfy the constitutional case or controversy requirement. Accordingly his motions must be denied. Signed by Magistrate Judge Joe J. Volpe on 7/13/2021. (lej)
July 8, 2021 Filing 8 MOTION for Order by Jamie Jubar Hollins. (llg)
July 8, 2021 Filing 7 MOTION for Order by Jamie Jubar Hollins. (llg)
June 25, 2021 Summons Issued as to Raylina Ramsey and forwarded to USMS for service. (ajt)
June 24, 2021 Opinion or Order Filing 6 ORDER that the Clerk prepare summons and the USM serve Defendant Ramsey without prepayment of fees and costs or security therefore. Signed by Magistrate Judge Joe J. Volpe on 6/24/2021. (lej)
June 24, 2021 Opinion or Order Filing 5 ORDER granting Plaintiff's IFP Application #2 . The Clerk shall mail a copy of this order to the Grimes Unit Warden, ADC Trust Bank, and the ADC Compliance Office. Service will be issued in a separate order. Signed by Magistrate Judge Joe J. Volpe on 6/24/2021. (lej)
June 23, 2021 Filing 4 Case electronically transferred in from District of Arkansas Western; Case Number 5:21-cv-05113. Electronic file copy of transfer order and docket sheet received.
June 22, 2021 Opinion or Order Filing 3 ORDER TRANSFERRING CASE to Eastern District of Arkansas, Northern Division. Docket Sheet and case documents sent to receiving court. Signed by Honorable Christy D. Comstock on June 22, 2021. (lgd) [Transferred from arwd on 6/23/2021.]
June 22, 2021 Filing 2 MOTION for Leave to Proceed in forma pauperis (42:1983) by Jamie Jubar Hollins. Motions referred to Mark E. Ford.(lgd) [Transferred from arwd on 6/23/2021.]
June 22, 2021 Filing 1 COMPLAINT REFERRED (42:1983) against Raylina Ramsey, filed by Jamie Jubar Hollins.(lgd) [Transferred from arwd on 6/23/2021.]

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 this case: Hollins v. Ramsey
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Plaintiff: Jamie Jubar Hollins
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Finance [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Defendant: Raylina Ramsey
Represented By: Rosalyn L. Middleton
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Finance [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]

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?