Hamilton v. Schock
Plaintiff:
Ted Hamilton
Defendant:
Charles Conrad Schock
Case Number:
4:2013cv00738
Filed:
December 24, 2013
Court:
Arkansas Eastern District Court
Office:
Little Rock Office
County:
Pulaski
Referring Judge:
Jerome T. Kearney
Presiding Judge:
D. P. Marshall
Nature of Suit:
Prison Condition
Cause of Action:
42:1983
Jury Demanded By:
None
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 |
|---|---|---|
| June 19, 2014 | 15 |
JUDGMENT dismissing without prejudice Hamilton's 2 Complaint. Signed by Judge D. P. Marshall Jr. on 6/19/2014. (jak)
|
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
| Search for this case: Hamilton v. Schock | |
|---|---|
| Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
| Search Web | [ Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ] |
| Defendant: Charles Conrad Schock | |
| 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 | [ Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ] |
| Plaintiff: Ted Hamilton | |
| 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 | [ 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.
