Farrar v. Arkansas Department of Human Services

Justia Dockets & Filings Eighth Circuit Arkansas Eastern District Farrar v. Arkansas Department of Human Services

Farrar v. Arkansas Department of Human Services

Plaintiff:	Yolanda Farrar
Defendant:	Arkansas Department of Human Services
Case Number:	4:2017cv00443
Filed:	July 11, 2017
Court:	US District Court for the Eastern District of Arkansas
Office:	Little Rock Office
County:	Pulaski
Presiding Judge:	James M. Moody
Nature of Suit:	Employment
Cause of Action:	42 U.S.C. § 2000
Jury Demanded By:	Both

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
October 15, 2019	Filing 82 JUDGMENT: The jury returned a verdict in favor of Defendant as to Plaintiff's claim for race discrimination and a verdict in favor of Plaintiff on her claim for retaliation, awarding her damages in the amount of $17,036.13 for loss of wages and benefits and $30,000 for other damages. The total amount of the judgment, $47,036.13, will bear interest at the lawful rate until paid. The Court will consider 81 Farrar's Petition for Attorneys' Fees and Costs once a response has been filed or the time for response has passed. Signed by Judge James M. Moody Jr. on 10/15/2019. (ljb)
April 26, 2018	Filing 22 ORDER granting 21 parties' joint motion to stay the case; directing the Clerk to administratively stay this action pending further orders of the Court; and directing the parties to provide a status report to the Court every 60 days following the entry of this order. Signed by Judge James M. Moody Jr. on 4/26/2018. (cmn)

Date Filed

Document Text

October 15, 2019

Filing 82 JUDGMENT: The jury returned a verdict in favor of Defendant as to Plaintiff's claim for race discrimination and a verdict in favor of Plaintiff on her claim for retaliation, awarding her damages in the amount of $17,036.13 for loss of wages and benefits and $30,000 for other damages. The total amount of the judgment, $47,036.13, will bear interest at the lawful rate until paid. The Court will consider 81 Farrar's Petition for Attorneys' Fees and Costs once a response has been filed or the time for response has passed. Signed by Judge James M. Moody Jr. on 10/15/2019. (ljb)

April 26, 2018

Filing 22 ORDER granting 21 parties' joint motion to stay the case; directing the Clerk to administratively stay this action pending further orders of the Court; and directing the parties to provide a status report to the Court every 60 days following the entry of this order. Signed by Judge James M. Moody Jr. on 4/26/2018. (cmn)

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: Farrar v. Arkansas Department of Human Services
Search News	[ Google News \| Marketwatch \| Wall Street Journal \| Financial Times \| New York Times ]
Search Web	[ Unicourt \| Legal Web \| Google \| Bing \| Yahoo \| Ask ]
Plaintiff: Yolanda Farrar
Represented By:	Alan G. Crone
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: Arkansas Department of Human Services
Represented By:	Vincent P. France
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?