Edwards v. Flynn et al
| Jeffrey Edwards |
| Sheri J Flynn and J Micheal Wood |
| 4:2022cv00993 |
| October 11, 2022 |
| US District Court for the Eastern District of Arkansas |
| Joe J Volpe |
| Billy Roy Wilson |
| Prison Condition: Civil Rights |
| 42 U.S.C. ยง 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights |
| Plaintiff |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on November 9, 2022. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Filing 13 APPELLATE FILING FEE NOTICE to Plaintiff. (jbh) |
Filing 12
JUDGMENT: Based on the #11 dispositive Order entered today, Plaintiff's claims are dismissed. I certify that an in forma pauperis appeal would not be taken in good faith. Signed by Judge Billy Roy Wilson on 11/9/2022. (jbh)
|
|
Filing 11
ORDER granting #10 Report and Recommendations. Accordingly, the Complaint (Doc. 2) is DISMISSED without prejudice for failing to state a claim upon which relief may be granted, and the Motion for a Preliminary Injunction (Doc. #6 ) is DENIED. The Court recommends dismissal count as a strike, in the future, for purposes of 28 U.S.C. 1915(g). And it is certified, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 1915(a)(3), that an in forma pauperis appeal would not be taken in good faith. Signed by Judge Billy Roy Wilson on 11/9/22. (mmb)
|
|
Filing 10
RECOMMENDED DISPOSITION that the complaint be dismissed without prejudice for failing to state a claim upon which relief may be granted #2 . The motion for preliminary injunction be denied #6 . The Court recommend dismissal of this case count as a strike, in the future, for purposes of 28 U.S.C. 1915(g). The Court certify, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 1915(a)(3), that an in forma pauperis appeal from an order adopting this recommendation and the accompanying judgment would not be taken in good faith. Objections due no later than 14 days from the date of this recommendation. Signed by Magistrate Judge Joe J. Volpe on 10/19/2022. (lej)
|
|
Filing 9
(This is a TEXT ENTRY ONLY. There is no pdf document associated with this entry.) ORDER denying #3 Motion to Appoint Counsel. A civil litigant does not have a constitutional or statutory right to appointed counsel in a civil action but the Court may appoint counsel at its discretion. 28 U.S.C. 1915(e)(1). The Court has considered Plaintiff's need for an attorney, the likelihood that Plaintiff will benefit from assistance of counsel, the factual complexity of the case, the Plaintiff's ability to investigate and present the case, and the complexity of the legal issues. In considering these factors, the Court finds that Plaintiff's claims do not appear legally or factually complex, and it appears Plaintiff is capable of prosecuting these claims without appointed counsel. Signed by Magistrate Judge Joe J. Volpe on 10/13/2022. (lej)
|
| Filing 8 DECLARATION in Support of #6 Motion for Preliminary Injunction filed by Jeffrey Edwards. (kdr) |
| Filing 7 MEMORANDUM of of Law in Support of #6 Motion for Preliminary Injunction filed by Jeffrey Edwards. (kdr) |
| Filing 6 MOTION for Preliminary Injunction by Jeffrey Edwards. (kdr) |
| Filing 5 DECLARATION in Support of #3 Motion to Appoint Counsel filed by Jeffrey Edwards. (kdr) |
| Filing 4 MEMORANDUM of Law in Support of #3 Motion to Appoint Counsel filed by Jeffrey Edwards. (kdr) |
| Filing 3 MOTION to Appoint Counsel by Jeffrey Edwards. (kdr) |
| Filing 2 COMPLAINT with Jury Demand against All Defendants, filed by Jeffrey Edwards.(kdr) |
| Filing 1 MOTION for Leave to Proceed in forma pauperis by Jeffrey Edwards. (kdr) |
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.
