Hill v. Arkansas Department of Community Correction et al
Plaintiff:
Mark A Hill
Defendant:
Jerry Bradshaw and Arkansas Department of Community Correction
Case Number:
4:2013cv00089
Filed:
February 21, 2013
Court:
Arkansas Eastern District Court
Office:
Little Rock Office
County:
Faulkner
Presiding Judge:
D. P. Marshall
Nature of Suit:
Civil Rights: Jobs
Cause of Action:
42:1983 Civil Rights (Employment Discrimination)
Jury Demanded By:
Plaintiff
Follow case documents by RSS
Available Case Documents
The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:
| Date Filed | # | Document Text |
|---|---|---|
| August 28, 2014 | 25 |
JUDGMENT dismissing without prejudice Hill's 1 Complaint. Signed by Judge D. P. Marshall Jr. on 8/28/2014. (jak)
|
| August 13, 2014 | 23 |
ORDER granting 21 Motion to Compel. Hill must respond to the interrogatories by 27 August 2014. If he does not, the Court will consider sanctions, including the dismissal of his case without prejudice for failure to prosecute. Signed by Judge D. P. Marshall Jr. on 8/13/2014. (jak)
|
| May 24, 2013 | 10 |
ORDER granting in part and denying in part 3 Motion to Dismiss; granting in part and denying in part 3 Motion to Dismiss for Failure to State a Claim. Plaintiff's 1983 claim against Bradshaw and his Title VII claim against the Arkansas Department of Community Corrections may proceed. Signed by Judge D. P. Marshall Jr. on 5/24/13. (kpr)
|
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.
