Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-arwd-3_06-cv-03002/USCOURTS-arwd-3_06-cv-03002-0/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 440
Nature of Suit: Other Civil Rights
Cause of Action: 42:1983 Civil Rights Act

---

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

WESTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS

HARRISON DIVISION

ROBERT D. JOHNSTON and

MELANIE K. JOHNSTON PLAINTIFFS

v. Civil No. 06-3002

JASON BRISCO, et al. DEFENDANTS 

O R D E R

Currently before the Court is plaintiffs’ pro se Motion to

Strike Notice of Legal Counsel Melanie Winslow Hoover[‘s] Entry of

Appearance for Non-Compliance with Federal Rules of Civil Procedure

(Doc. 37). The Court finds and orders as follows with respect

thereto:

1. Plaintiffs say that Ms. Hoover’s notice of appearance is

defective because the certificate of service shows that service of the

notice was made upon “Robert D. and Melanie K. Johnston” jointly

rather than upon separate plaintiff Robert D. Johnston and separate

plaintiff Melanie K. Johnston. They do not contend that they did not

receive Ms. Hoover’s notice of appearance, rather, they merely take

issue with the manner in which Ms. Hoover identified them on her

certificate of service. 

2. Plaintiffs’ contentions are without merit. Accordingly,

plaintiffs’ Motion to Strike (Doc. 37) is without merit and is DENIED.

3. Plaintiffs shall have ten days from the date of this order

in which to respond to the Motion to Dismiss (Doc. 26) and the Motion

to Quash (Doc. 31) filed by Ms. Hoover on behalf of separate

defendants Gordon Webb, John Putman, Gary Isbell, James Johnson, and

Trish Smith. 

IT IS SO ORDERED this 8 day of February 2006.

th

/S/JIMM LARRY HENDREN 

JIMM LARRY HENDREN

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 

Case 3:06-cv-03002-RTD Document 41 Filed 02/08/06 Page 1 of 1 PageID #: <pageID>