Newingham v. Harmon et al

Case Number: 5:2006cv00325
Filed: April 20, 2006
Court: Arkansas Eastern District Court
Office: Pine Bluff Office
Presiding Judge: J. Leon Holmes
Referring Judge: Henry L. Jones
Nature of Suit: Prison Condition: Civil Rights
Cause of Action: 42:1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Jury Demanded By: Plaintiff

Available Case Documents

The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:

Date Filed#Document Text
January 12, 2009 104 Opinion or Order of the Court JUDGMENT in favor of David Westbrook, Greg Harmon against Grady Newingham re 102 Jury Verdict dismissing plaintiff's claims with prejudice. Signed by Judge Brian S. Miller on 1/12/09. (bkp)
December 31, 2008 93 Opinion or Order of the Court ORDER authorizing Christine Boozer, Karen Clark, Robert Clark, Greg Harmon, Mark Harris, Shawn Johnson, Larry Norris, Stephen Williams and Perry Young to bring a cell phone, laptop computer, or personal digital assistant into the Richard Sheppard Arnold U.S. Courthouse between Monday, January 5, 2009, and Wednesday, January 7, 2009, subject to the rules set forth in this Order. Signed by Judge Brian S. Miller on 12/31/08. (bkp)
November 18, 2008 69 Opinion or Order of the Court ORDER granting 67 Motion to Dismiss deft Kay Wade, a separate Order to be entered on the 67 Motion to Amend/Correct. Signed by Judge Brian S. Miller on 11/18/08. (bkp)

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: Newingham v. Harmon et al
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ 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?