Case law

Granada v. Carrier

District Court, W.D. Arkansas · Oct 27, 2022

must dismiss a complaint, or any portion of it, if it contains claims that: (1) are frivolous, malicious, or fail to state a claim upon which relief may be granted; or (2) seek monetary relief from a defendant who is immune … Conrad, 749 F.App’x. 490, 491 (8th Cir. 2019) (affirming preservice dismissal and holding that “prison officials did not violate a clearly established constitutional right by allowing female guards to monitor Bell through

Kennedy v. Sun Life Assurance Co.

833 F. Supp. 2d 1088 · District Court, W.D. Arkansas · Jun 16, 2011

Hall states, “it is not entirely clear to this reviewer how the diagnosis of CVA [stroke] was established insofar as imaging studies failed to reveal a new cerebrovascular accident.” Id. Dr. … It is noted that Plaintiff failed to submit a medical evaluation for his mental health problems from a qualified psychiatrist.

Jackson v. WalMart, Inc.

District Court, W.D. Arkansas · Mar 25, 2024

Schriro, 189 F.3d 781, 783 (8th Cir. 1999) (per curiam) (pro se complaint must be liberally construed and plaintiff clearly intended for amended complaint to be read together with original complaint). … The Eighth Circuit in Gregory concluded that “discriminatory surveillance by a retailer is insufficient to establish interference with protected activity under § 1981.”

Cox v. Drumwright

District Court, W.D. Arkansas · Dec 28, 2023

My legal mail was clearly tampered with. (ECF No. 1, pp. 4-5) (errors in original). … must dismiss a complaint, or any portion of it, if it contains claims that: (1) are frivolous, malicious, or fail to state a claim upon which relief may be granted, or (2) seek monetary relief from a defendant who is immune

Joyce v. Murry

District Court, W.D. Arkansas · Feb 2, 2024

They also argue he is entitled to qualified immunity if the Court were to determine that he violated Plaintiff’s constitutional rights. (Id. at 15-16). … Therefore, the fact that force is used during an arrest does not ipso facto establish a Fourth-Amendment violation. Crumley v. City of St.

Ybarra v. Little River Detention Center

District Court, W.D. Arkansas · Jun 26, 2023

Conard, 749 F.App’x 490, 491 (8th Cir. 2019) (affirming preservice dismissal and holding that “prison officials did not violate a clearly established constitutional right by allowing female guards to monitor Bell through … Here, Plaintiff clearly believes that Dr. Elkins should have done more to address her allergies.

Kruel v. John Doe

District Court, W.D. Arkansas · Oct 8, 2024

The Plaintiff must clearly designate on the face of the document that it is a First Amended Complaint. The First Amended Complaint must be retyped or rewritten in its entirety on the court-approved form. … The next method of establishing municipal liability is through the existence of an unofficial custom.

Rochell v. Cody Ross

District Court, W.D. Arkansas · Sep 17, 2021

The Court then issued its ruling on summary judgment, denying Detective Ross qualified immunity on the excessive-force claim and framing the claim as follows: … Rochell’s] sudden[] appear[ance] with an AR-15 rifle and move[ment] toward Ross . . . . was clearly the type of rapidly evolving situation where an officer is forced to make split-second decisions with

Solomon v. Campbell

District Court, W.D. Arkansas · Feb 26, 2019

. § 1997e(e); 6) Defendants did not retaliate against Plaintiff; 7) Defendants are entitled to qualified immunity; and 8) there is no basis for official capacity liability. … immunity.

McKinney v. Plyler

District Court, W.D. Arkansas · Jul 2, 2018

immunity for Plaintiff’s claim of deliberate indifference to his medical needs; (3) Defendant Plyler had probable cause to arrest Plaintiff for Felony Domestic Battery, and is therefore entitled to qualified immunity; … An officer is entitled to qualified immunity for a warrantless arrest if the arrest was supported by at least “arguable probable cause.” Id. at 1226.

Phillips v. United States

District Court, W.D. Arkansas · Feb 14, 2022

Levy and in its failure to establish adequate policies and procedures that would prevent the harm Mr. Phillips suffered. … The Court disagrees with the United States’ conclusion, but its argument is clearly within the bounds of good faith. Plaintiff argues the Eighth Circuit case Vaughns v. United States, 20 F.

McConnell v. Carrier

District Court, W.D. Arkansas · Nov 3, 2022

must dismiss a complaint, or any portion of it, if it contains claims that: (1) are frivolous, malicious, or fail to state a claim upon which relief may be granted, or (2) seeks monetary relief from a defendant who is immune … Conrad, 749 F.App’x. 490, 491 (8th Cir. 2019) (affirming preservice dismissal and holding that “prison officials did not violate a clearly established constitutional right by allowing female guards to monitor Bell through

Piel v. Runion

District Court, W.D. Arkansas · Sep 14, 2022

This was a clear violation of Plaintiffs rights whom was in greater need of these protections due to compromised immune status. … Defendants had a clearly established knowledge of and disregarded the substantial risk of harm…Defendants acted with deliberate indifference to a prison condition that exposes a prisoner to an unreasonable risk of serious

El Dorado Chemical Co. v. United States Environmental Protection Agency

960 F. Supp. 2d 838 · District Court, W.D. Arkansas · Mar 25, 2013

Generally, “[sjtates are responsible for reviewing, establishing, and revising water quality standards.” 40 C.F.R. § 131.4 (a). … may include: (1) historical data analysis; (2) whole effluent toxicity testing; (3) benthic community sampling and analysis; and (4) fish collection analysis. 15 Therefore, any “outdated information” that EPA considered qualifies

Mitchell v. Alma School District No. 30

332 F. Supp. 473 · District Court, W.D. Arkansas · Oct 4, 1971

He is an able teacher, more than well qualified; extremely interested in being a good teacher and improving the whole process of scholastic training. … The testimony of the Board members establish that Mr.

Finney v. Saeilo, Inc.

District Court, W.D. Arkansas · Aug 13, 2024

Screening potential expert witnesses is meant to determine if the testimony is “supported by appropriate validation—i.e., ‘good grounds,’” so that “a standard of evidentiary reliability” is established. … In response, Plaintiffs argue that Belk’s nearly life-long experience with firearm handling, assembly, and maintenance makes him clearly qualified as an expert under Rule 702. ECF No. 43, p. 6.

Jerel McElroy v. Warden John K. Miners; Major Vicky Walker; Lieutenant Sharita Dedmon; John and Jane Doe Employees of the SWACCC Medical Department; Disciplinary Hearing Committee; and Tinda Hodge

District Court, W.D. Arkansas · Mar 27, 2026

“When conducting a de novo review, the district court makes its own determinations of disputed issues and does not decide whether the magistrate’s proposed findings are clearly erroneous.” Branch v. … Judge Comstock first recommends that Plaintiff’s claims against Defendant DHC be dismissed without prejudice on sovereign immunity grounds. Id.

Wesley v. Kinley

District Court, W.D. Arkansas · Jan 18, 2023

“A movant must show he is likely to suffer irreparable harm in the absence of preliminary relief” to establish the need for injunctive relief. Id. (emphasis added). … Arkansas Dept. of Human Services, 364 F.3d 925, 933 (8th Cir. 2004) (reversing injunction as it applied to a nonparty concluding that nonparty's mere “supervisory” role did not qualify as active participation within the

Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. v. Crist

664 F. Supp. 1242 · District Court, W.D. Arkansas · Jul 6, 1987

(Muldoon), which was established in 1981 to “do fronting” for Transit. Transit retained a 24% ownership interest in Muldoon. … The policy that Sooter got and accepted clearly provided otherwise.

Yeager v. KUAF 91.3 NPR PUBLIC RADIO

District Court, W.D. Arkansas · May 12, 2020

The Arkansas Supreme Court has explained that the second element means that the plaintiff must establish “actual malice” by the defendant. … Indeed, in the context of defamation claims, the Arkansas Supreme Court has clearly stated that the “publisher of a libelous article shall be liable to the defamed private individual for failure fo exercise ordinary