Day v. Pinkston et al
| Kevin Lee Day |
| Jada Pinkston, Robert Gilbert, Lance Bonds, Brian Zini, Mary Catherine Elder and Jana Pinkston |
| 4:2022cv00530 |
| June 6, 2022 |
| US District Court for the Eastern District of Arkansas |
| James M Moody |
| Prisoner: Civil Rights |
| 42 U.S.C. ยง 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights |
| Plaintiff |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on June 29, 2022. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Filing 5 APPELLATE FILING FEE NOTICE to Plaintiff. (llg) |
Filing 4
JUDGMENT: Consistent with #3 Order entered on this day, this case is hereby dismissed without prejudice. Signed by Judge James M. Moody Jr. on 06/29/2022. (llg)
|
|
Filing 3
ORDER dismissing Day's complaint for failure to state a claim on which relief may be granted; granting #1 motion to proceed in forma pauperis; directing monthly payments be made from Plaintiff's prison trust account for the $350 filing fee; directing the clerk to send a copy of this order to the Administrator of the Stone County Jail; and certifying an in forma pauperis appeal would not be taken in good faith. Signed by Judge James M. Moody Jr. on 06/29/2022. (llg)
|
| Filing 2 COMPLAINT with Jury Demand against All Defendants, filed by Kevin Lee Day. (ldb) |
| Filing 1 MOTION for Leave to Proceed in forma pauperis by Kevin Lee Day. (ldb) |
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.
