Laymance v. Shourd
This text of Laymance v. Shourd (Laymance v. Shourd) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court, E.D. Arkansas primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS WESTERN DIVISION
JEREMY DEAN LAYMANCE PLAINTIFF
v. No. 4:17-cv-303-DPM-JTR RICKY SHOURD, Sheriff, White County Sheriff Office; PAUL HOFSTEAD, Deputy, White County Sheriff Office; SHARON VAN COMPERNOLLE, Great Grandparent of Child; JOHN VAN COMPERNOLLE, Great Grandparent of Child; CASEY WALKER, Agent, Department of Human Services; WHITE COUNTY, ARKANSAS; and ANDERSON COUNTY, TEXAS DEFENDANTS
ORDER Unopposed partial recommendation, Ne 38, adopted. FED. R. CIv. P. 72(b) (1983 addition to advisory committee notes); see also Lawson v. Simmons Sporting Goods, Inc., 2019 Ark. 84, 569 S.W.3d 865. Motion to dismiss, Ne 34, granted. Laymance’s remaining claims against Sharon and John Van Compernolle are dismissed without prejudice for lack of personal jurisdiction. So Ordered.
D.P. Marshall Jr. United States District Judge (0 Mom f~ol4
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
Laymance v. Shourd, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/laymance-v-shourd-ared-2019.