Simpson v. Little Rock, City of et al
| Cedrick Simpson |
| Little Rock, City of, Greg Siegler and Does |
| 4:2014cv00165 |
| March 17, 2014 |
| US District Court for the Eastern District of Arkansas |
| Little Rock Office |
| Pulaski |
| D. P. Marshall |
| Other Civil Rights |
| 42 U.S.C. ยง 1983 |
| Plaintiff |
Follow case documents by RSS
Available Case Documents
The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing
71
AMENDED JUDGMENT: Simpson's claims against the Doe defendants are dismissed without prejudice. As against the City and Siegler, Counts 1-2 and 5-7 of the complaint are dismissed with prejudice; counts 3-4 and 8-12 are dismissed without prejudice. Signed by Judge D. P. Marshall Jr. on 7/25/2016. (jak) (Docket text modified on 7/25/2016 pursuant to instruction from chambers). (jak)
|
|
Filing
69
ORDER granting in part and denying in part 56 Motion. Counts 1-2 and 5-7 of Simpson's complaint will be dismissed with prejudice; Counts 3-4 and 8-12 will be dismissed without prejudice. Signed by Judge D. P. Marshall Jr. on 7/22/2016. (jak)
|
|
Filing
41
ORDER: The Court would appreciate the parties addressing these topics in their trial briefs: qualified immunity and the effect of acquittal on the Brady claim. Those briefs are due 5 February 2016. They must be less than ten pages. No responding briefs needed. Signed by Judge D. P. Marshall Jr. on 1/29/2016. (jak)
|
|
Filing
11
ORDER granting 8 Motion to Set Aside Default. Signed by Judge D. P. Marshall Jr. on 5/16/2014. (jak)
|
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.
