Cantrell v. Beebe et al

Filing 108

ORDER denying 106 Motion for TRO; denying 106 Motion for Preliminary Injunction; denying 106 Motion for Copies. Signed by Magistrate Judge Jerome T. Kearney on 7/8/10. (bkp)

Download PDF
Cantrell v. Beebe et al Doc. 108 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS HELENA DIVISION JIMMY SHANE CANTRELL, ADC #98730 v. MIKE BEEBE, et al. ORDER This matter is before the Court on the plaintiff's motion for temporary restraining order, preliminary injunction, and for copies, which this Court construes as a motion for order (Doc. No. 106). Defendants have filed a response to the motion (Doc. No. 107). In his motion, plaintiff asks for the same relief requested in prior motions, which was addressed in the Court's May 14, 2010 Recommendations and June 18, 2010 Order. Defendants note this in their response, and add that they are not acting in any way to impede plaintiff's receipt of mail from the Court or from the defendants' counsel. In the June 18, 2010 Order, the Court granted plaintiff's motions for an extension of time and for copies, and directed that such be forwarded to plaintiff. The Certificate of Mailing of that Order indicates the copies were sent to the plaintiff. The Court notes that plaintiff's present motion was dated June 14, 2010, which is prior to that June 18, 2010 Order. Therefore, the Court will deny plaintiff's motion without prejudice. Accordingly, 2:09CV00184BSM/JTK DEFENDANTS PLAINTIFF IT IS, THEREFORE, ORDERED that plaintiff's motion for order (Doc. No. 106) is hereby DENIED without prejudice. 1 IT IS SO ORDERED this 8th day of July, 2010. ____________________________________ United States Magistrate Judge 2

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?