Potter v. Gober et al
Plaintiff: Andrew Potter
Defendant: Mark Gober and Susan Potts
Case Number: 4:2022cv00329
Filed: April 8, 2022
Court: US District Court for the Eastern District of Arkansas
Presiding Judge: J Thomas Ray
Referring Judge: Billy Roy Wilson
Nature of Suit: Prison Condition: Civil Rights
Cause of Action: 42 U.S.C. ยง 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Jury Demanded By: None
Docket Report

This docket was last retrieved on May 26, 2022. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.

Date Filed Document Text
May 26, 2022 Filing 10 Mail Returned Undeliverable as to Andrew Potter re #9 Appellate Filing Fee Notice. (fjg)
May 16, 2022 Filing 9 APPELLATE FILING FEE NOTICE to Plaintiff. (kdr)
May 16, 2022 Opinion or Order Filing 8 JUDGMENT: Pursuant to #7 order filed this date, judgment is entered dismissing this case without prejudice. Signed by Judge Billy Roy Wilson on 5/16/2022. (kdr)
May 16, 2022 Opinion or Order Filing 7 ORDER: This case is dismissed without prejudice due to a lack of prosecution. The Court certifies that an in forma pauperis appeal from this Order would not be taken in good faith. Signed by Judge Billy Roy Wilson on 5/16/2022. (kdr)
May 9, 2022 Filing 6 Mail Returned Undeliverable as to Andrew Potter re 1983 complaint form labeled Amended Complaint. (fjg)
April 11, 2022 Opinion or Order Filing 5 INITIAL ORDER FOR PRO SE PRISONERS granting #1 IFP Motion; directing monthly payments be collected from Plaintiff's institutional account until a total of $350 has been paid; and directing the Clerk to send a copy of this Order to the Jail Administrator for the Drew County Detention Facility. Signed by Magistrate Judge J. Thomas Ray on 4/11/2022. (kdr)
April 11, 2022 Opinion or Order Filing 4 ORDER directing the Clerk to mail Potter a 1983 complaint form that islabeled Amended Complaint; and allowing Potter to file, within 30 days of the date of this Order, an Amended Complaint that complies with the directions in this Order. Signed by Magistrate Judge J. Thomas Ray on 4/11/2022. (kdr)
April 11, 2022 Filing 3 NOTICE OF DOCKET CORRECTION re #1 MOTION for Leave to Proceed in forma pauperis. CORRECTION: The original document was attached in error (lack of case number). The correct document was added to docket entry #1 and is attached hereto for review by the parties. (jak)
April 8, 2022 Filing 2 COMPLAINT against All Defendants, filed by Andrew Potter. (ldb)
April 8, 2022 Filing 1 MOTION for Leave to Proceed in forma pauperis by Andrew Potter. (ldb) (Additional attachment(s) added on 4/11/2022: #1 Main Document - Correct) (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 this case: Potter v. Gober et al
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Plaintiff: Andrew Potter
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: Mark Gober
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: Susan Potts
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?