Earls v. Stringfellow et al
| Jacob Thomas Earls |
| Stringfellow and Author Brown |
| 5:2017cv00091 |
| April 3, 2017 |
| US District Court for the Eastern District of Arkansas |
| Pine Bluff Office |
| Lincoln |
| D. P. Marshall |
| J. Thomas Ray |
| Prison Condition |
| 42 U.S.C. ยง 1983 |
| Defendant |
Follow case documents by RSS
Available Case Documents
The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing
53
JUDGMENT: Earls's complaint is dismissed with prejudice. Signed by Judge D. P. Marshall Jr. on 8/21/2018. (jak)
|
|
Filing
37
ORDER allowing Plaintiff until and including 2/19/2018, to file a Response to 34 Defendant's Motion for Summary Judgment and a separate Statement of Disputed Facts. Signed by Magistrate Judge J. Thomas Ray on 1/26/2018. (kdr)
|
|
Filing
30
ORDER adopting 22 Recommendation. Earls's 18 Motion for preliminary injunctive relief is denied. An in forma pauperis appeal from this Order would not be taken in good faith. Signed by Judge D. P. Marshall Jr. on 12/21/2017. (jak)
|
|
Filing
22
RECOMMENDED PARTIAL DISPOSITION recommending that 18 Earls's Motion for Temporary Restraining Order or Preliminary Injunction be denied; and the Court certify that an in forma pauperis appeal from any Order adopting this Recommendation would not be taken in good faith. Objections due within 14 days of this Recommendation. Signed by Magistrate Judge J. Thomas Ray on 11/27/2017. (kdr)
|
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.
