Doe et al v. Arkansas Department of Education et al

Filing 133

ORDER: The Court notes that the docket is incomplete after its 92 Order approved another amendment to the complaint. The Court directs the Clerk to add Tasha Covington, Auxzavion Love, Amoxyea Love, Ronyha Beyah, Rasheed Beyah, Kareem Beyah, Ida Pettus, Lazareous Pettus, and Ezekiel Pettus as additional plaintiffs. The Court construes the 125 Stipulation for Dismissal as a joint partial motion to dismiss, and grants it. All claims of Candice Doe, James Doe, Jade Doe, Kareem Beyah, Rasheed Beyah, Ronyha Beyah, and Ezekiel Pettus are dismissed without prejudice. All of them are no longer parties. Signed by Judge D. P. Marshall Jr. on 5/4/2017. (jak)

Download PDF
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS WESTERN DIVISION LAKESHA DOE, Parent, et al. v. PLAINTIFFS No. 4:15-cv-623-DPM JOHNNY KEY, In His Official Capacity as Commissioner of Education and the LRSD School Board, and MICHAEL POORE, In His Official Capacity as Superintendent of the Little Rock School District DEFENDANTS ORDER 1. The Court notes that the docket is incomplete after its Order, NQ 92 at 4-5, approved another amendment to the complaint. Ng 91. The Court directs the Clerk to add Tasha Covington, Auxzavion Love, Amoxyea Love, Ronyha Beyah, Rasheed Beyah, Kareem Beyah, Ida Pettus, Lazareous Pettus, and Ezekiel Pettus as additional plaintiffs.* 2. The Court construes the stipulation for dismissal, NQ 125, as a joint partial motion to dismiss, and grants it. All claims of Candice Doe, James Doe, Jade Doe, Kareem Beyah, Rasheed Beyah, Ronyha Beyah, and Ezekiel Pettus are dismissed without prejudice. All of them are no longer parties. *The parties have informally clarified the correct the spelling for all three Beyah plaintiffs: Ronyha, Rasheed, and Kareem. So Ordered. D.P. MarshaJ r. United States District 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?