Case law

Warren v. West

District Court, E.D. Arkansas · Jan 4, 2021

For instance, he names grievance coordinator Justin Peters and Nurse Jane Doe as defendants, but does not clearly describe how they were involved in the violation of his rights. See Doc. No. 1 at 9-15. … He should note that participation in the administrative grievance procedure alone is insufficient to establish liability under § 1983. See Rowe v. Norris, 198 F.

Peone v. USA

District Court, E.D. Arkansas · Oct 13, 2020

The FTCA includes an express waiver of sovereign immunity, making the United States liable for the torts of its employees. 28 U.S.C. § 1346(b)(1). … “TOP is an administrative procedure established by statue and administered under implementing regulations, which provide due process to debtors against whom offset is sought.” United States v.

Clark v. Board of Education

316 F. Supp. 1209 · District Court, E.D. Arkansas · Sep 24, 1970

Built pre-Brown as a legally established white junior high school. … The Board’s plan clearly will not achieve racial balance in all of the junior high schools of the District.

Michael Mitchell v. Moet Williams, et al.

District Court, E.D. Arkansas · May 11, 2026

The Court must also weigh all factual allegations in favor of the plaintiff, unless the facts alleged are clearly baseless. Denton v. Hernandez, 504 U.S. 25, 32 (1992). II. … To establish municipal liability, a plaintiff must prove that an official municipal policy, deliberately indifferent failure to train or supervise, or unofficial custom caused the constitutional injury.

Hatter v. Higgins

District Court, E.D. Arkansas · Aug 14, 2024

complaint or portion thereof if the prisoner has raised claims that: (a) are legally frivolous or malicious; (b) fail to state a claim upon which relief may be granted; or (c) seek monetary relief from a defendant who is immune … The Court must also weigh all factual allegations in favor of the plaintiff, unless the facts alleged are clearly baseless. Denton v. Hernandez, 504 U.S. 25, 32 (1992). III.

United Furniture Workers v. Little Rock Furniture Mfg. Co.

148 F. Supp. 129 · District Court, E.D. Arkansas · Feb 4, 1957

The contract itself must make the precise act which is to be done clearly ascertainable. … In the case last above cited, Judge Miller said: “The defendant does not have an ‘established right’ to have its case tried in a United States District Court.

Stanley v. Drew County Detention Facility Center

District Court, E.D. Arkansas · Sep 4, 2025

complaint or portion thereof if the prisoner has raised claims that: (a) are legally frivolous or malicious; (b) fail to state a claim upon which relief may be granted; or (c) seek monetary relief from a defendant who is immune … The Court must also weigh all factual allegations in favor of the plaintiff, unless the facts alleged are clearly baseless. Denton v. Hernandez, 504 U.S. 25, 32 (1992).

Knowles v. Morris

District Court, E.D. Arkansas · Mar 28, 2025

The Court must also weigh all factual allegations in favor of the plaintiff, unless the facts alleged are clearly baseless. Denton v. Hernandez, 504 U.S. 25, 32 (1992). II. … App'x 580 (8th Cir. 2006) (to establish liability in official-capacity suit under § 1983, plaintiff must show defendant took action pursuant to unconstitutional governmental policy or custom) (citation omitted).

Holloway v. Arkansas General Assembly

District Court, E.D. Arkansas · Mar 16, 2022

As the Court noted in the Preliminary Injunction Order, “[a] suit against a state official for money in federal court raises the specters of Eleventh Amendment immunity, state sovereign immunity, and qualified immunity … That seems to strike at the heart of the immunity doctrines. Even if such an order would technically not be barred by immunity, the same considerations create “exceptional or unusual 92 Thomas v.

Pulley v. United Health Group Inc.

945 F. Supp. 2d 1019 · District Court, E.D. Arkansas · May 10, 2013

“To establish a prima facie case of racial discrimination in a failure-to-promote claim, a plaintiff must show (1) [he] is a member of a protected group; (2) [he] was qualified and applied for a promotion to an available … Pulley] must establish a prima facie case, which requires proof that [he] (1) is a member of a protected class, (2) was qualified, (3) suffered an adverse employment action, and (4) can provide facts that give rise to an

Kirkland v. Arkansas-Best Freight System, Inc.

475 F. Supp. 180 · District Court, E.D. Arkansas · Jun 21, 1979

Established rules of procedure were not followed with respect to the change of operations. a. … An employer member of the Committee had a significant interest in Arkansas-Best and, thus, was not qualified to sit as a member of the Committee. c. A complete record of the hearing was not kept. 31.

Elmore v. Payne

District Court, E.D. Arkansas · Mar 7, 2025

complaint or portion thereof if the prisoner has raised claims that: (a) are legally frivolous or malicious; (b) fail to state a claim upon which relief may be granted; or (c) seek monetary relief from a defendant who is immune … The Court must also weigh all factual allegations in favor of the plaintiff, unless the facts alleged are clearly baseless. Denton v.

Elmore v. Johnson

District Court, E.D. Arkansas · Mar 7, 2025

complaint or portion thereof if the prisoner has raised claims that: (a) are legally frivolous or malicious; (b) fail to state a claim upon which relief may be granted; or (c) seek monetary relief from a defendant who is immune … The Court must also weigh all factual allegations in favor of the plaintiff, unless the facts alleged are clearly baseless. Denton v.

Vanderbilt v. Arkansas Department of Corrections

District Court, E.D. Arkansas · Jan 20, 2023

The Court must also weigh all factual allegations in favor of the plaintiff, unless the facts alleged are clearly baseless. Denton v. Hernandez, 504 U.S. 25, 32 (1992). II. … Establishing retaliatory animus is crucial to a plaintiff’s retaliation claim. See Atkinson v. Bohn, 91 F.3d 1127, 1129 (8th Cir. 1996). See also Bitzan v.

Tennessee, State of v. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission

District Court, E.D. Arkansas · Jun 14, 2024

More importantly, they haven't established Article III's “irreducible constitutional minimum” —injury in fact, causation, and redressability. Lujan, 504 U.S. at 560. … They haven't tried to “quantify, or clearly explain, their generally alleged compliance costs.” Ibid. It would be inequitable to grant them the extraordinary relief they seek on this record.

Hayes v. Griffin

District Court, E.D. Arkansas · Mar 16, 2022

As the Court noted in the Preliminary Injunction Order, “[a] suit against a state official for money in federal court raises the specters of Eleventh Amendment immunity, state sovereign immunity, and qualified immunity … That seems to strike at the heart of the immunity doctrines. Even if such an order would technically not be barred by immunity, the same considerations create “exceptional or unusual 92 Thomas v.

Jones Truck Lines, Inc. v. AFCO Steel, Inc.

849 F. Supp. 1296 · District Court, E.D. Arkansas · Mar 17, 1994

The NRA was clearly a response to claims made by trustees for bankrupt motor carriers. Alliance Rubber Company, supra, at 1298. … Standard, Transportation Services, 955 F.2d 529 (8th Cir.1992), the Eighth Circuit established the legal rule on this issue: “It is well established that the ICC has primary jurisdiction to determine whether filed rates were

Lamar v. Sanders

District Court, E.D. Arkansas · Mar 16, 2022

As the Court noted in the Preliminary Injunction Order, “[a] suit against a state official for money in federal court raises the specters of Eleventh Amendment immunity, state sovereign immunity, and qualified immunity … That seems to strike at the heart of the immunity doctrines. Even if such an order would technically not be barred by immunity, the same considerations create “exceptional or unusual 92 Thomas v.

Brennan v. USA

District Court, E.D. Arkansas · Jul 13, 2020

Some courts, observing that § 634(b)(1)’s language precluding injunctive relief against the Administrator is qualified by the introductory clause of § 634(b), “[i]n the performance of, and with respect to the functions, … The Eighth Circuit has yet to consider the issue of whether § 634(b)(1) provides the SBA with blanket immunity against suits seeking injunctive relief.

Coleman v. Arkansas Department of Correction

District Court, E.D. Arkansas · Sep 23, 2021

Coleman cannot establish a prima facia case of disability discrimination because she is not a qualified individual under the ADA. In order to be a qualified individual under the ADA, Ms. … Coleman was a qualified individual under the ADA. Ms.