From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Clark v. Admin

United States District Court, Eastern District of Arkansas
Jul 8, 2024
3:23-cv-00171-LPR (E.D. Ark. Jul. 8, 2024)

Opinion

3:23-cv-00171-LPR

07-08-2024

VERNA CLARK ADC #712557, PLAINTIFF v. TIGER ADMIN, Law Enforcement Officer Trumann, AR, et al., DEFENDANTS


ORDER

LEE P. RWOFSKY, UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Plaintiff Verna Clark filed this action pro se. On April 25, 2024, the Court issued an Order granting Ms. Clark's request to proceed in forma pauperis and explaining that her Complaint was deficient for failure to state a claim. The Court gave Ms. Clark forty-five days to amend her Complaint, and warned her that failure to file an amended complaint would result in the dismissal of her case. Ms. Clark has not complied with, or otherwise responded to, the Court's April 25th Order, and the time for doing so has expired.

Compl. (Doc. 2).

Order (Doc. 10).

Id.

Accordingly, for the reasons stated in the Court's April 25, 2024 Order, Ms. Clark's Complaint (Doc. 2) is DISMISSED without prejudice. The Court certifies, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3), that an in forma pauperis appeal of this Order or the accompanying Judgment would not be taken in good faith.

IT IS SO ORDERED.


Summaries of

Clark v. Admin

United States District Court, Eastern District of Arkansas
Jul 8, 2024
3:23-cv-00171-LPR (E.D. Ark. Jul. 8, 2024)
Case details for

Clark v. Admin

Case Details

Full title:VERNA CLARK ADC #712557, PLAINTIFF v. TIGER ADMIN, Law Enforcement Officer…

Court:United States District Court, Eastern District of Arkansas

Date published: Jul 8, 2024

Citations

3:23-cv-00171-LPR (E.D. Ark. Jul. 8, 2024)