Caradine v. Doe et al
| William F Caradine, II |
| Doe and Nina Ridenour |
| 2:2011cv02003 |
| January 7, 2011 |
| US District Court for the Western District of Arkansas |
| Fort Smith Office |
| U.S., Outside State |
| Robert T. Dawson |
| Civil Rights |
| 42 U.S.C. ยง 1983 |
| None |
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
22
ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS in its entirety. Further denying 16 MOTION for Leave to Appeal in forma pauperis filed by William F Caradine, II, as the appeal is not taken in good faith, because Plaintiffs claims are frivolous. Signed by Honorable Robert T. Dawson on June 10, 2011. (lw)
|
|
Filing
14
ORDER ADOPTING 12 REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS in its entirety and denying plaintiff's 1 Motion for Leave to Proceed in forma pauperis; further plaintiff's complaint is dismissed on the grounds that the federal claims are frivolous and fai l to state claims upon which relief may be granted; further plaintiff advised that this dismissal is considered a "strike" for purpose of the Prison Litigation Reform Act and directing the U.S. District Clerk to collect the $350.00 filing fee from plaintiff. Signed by Honorable Robert T. Dawson on April 5, 2011. (rw)
|
|
Filing
3
ORDER immediately transferring case to the United States District Court for the Western District of Arkansas. Signed by Judge James M. Moody on 1/6/11. (bkp) [Transferred from ared on 1/7/2011.]
|
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 Western 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.
