Wright v. J & S Extradition Services LLC et al
Plaintiff: James Brian Wright
Defendant: John Does #1-20, J & S Extradition Services LLC and Sam Wright
Case Number: 3:2011cv00464
Filed: May 16, 2011
Court: US District Court for the Middle District of Tennessee
Office: Nashville Office
County: Rutherford
Presiding Judge: William J. Haynes
Nature of Suit: Civil Rights
Cause of Action: 42 U.S.C. ยง 1983
Jury Demanded By: None

Available Case Documents

The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:

Date Filed Document Text
March 30, 2012 Opinion or Order Filing 114 MEMORANDUM signed by District Judge William J. Haynes, Jr on 3/30/2012. (Attachments: # 1 Text Searchable Memo)(xc:Pro se party by regular and certified mail.)(hb)
January 30, 2012 Opinion or Order Filing 91 MEMORANDUM OPINION OF THE COURT: Plaintiff's Motion for Alternative Service of Process (Docket Entry No. 44 ) is DENIED. It is so ORDERED. Signed by Magistrate Judge John S. Bryant on 1/30/2012. (xc:Pro se party by regular and certified mail.)(hb)
September 9, 2011 Opinion or Order Filing 40 ORDER denying 34 Motion for Subpoena Duces Tecum. Signed by District Judge William J. Haynes, Jr on 9/9/11. (xc:Pro se party by regular and certified mail.)(dt)
September 6, 2011 Opinion or Order Filing 37 ORDER granting 33 Motion for Leave to Conduct Expedited Discovery. Signed by Magistrate Judge John S. Bryant on 9/6/11. (xc:Pro se party by regular and certified mail.)(dt)
August 23, 2011 Opinion or Order Filing 25 ORDER: Motion to Amend Complaint 15 is Granted. Motion to Waive Fee 18 is Granted. The Clerk is directed to send the Plaintiff a copy of his amended complaint 15 at no cost. Motion to Issue Summons 23 and 24 are Granted. The U.S. Marshal shall attempt to serve the defendants at the addresses provided by the Plaintiff in his Motions to Issue Summons. Signed by District Judge William J. Haynes, Jr on 8/23/11. (xc:Pro se party by regular and certified mail.)(dt)
August 2, 2011 Opinion or Order Filing 19 ORDER: The Clerk shall provide the plaintiff with a copy of the docket sheet and a form pro se complaint. Signed by District Judge William J. Haynes, Jr on 7/25/11. (xc:Pro se party by regular and certified mail.)(dt)
Access additional case information on PACER

Use the links below to access additional information about this case on the US Court's PACER system. A subscription to PACER is required.

Access this case on the Tennessee Middle District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: Wright v. J & S Extradition Services LLC et al
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Defendant: John Does #1-20
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Finance [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Defendant: J & S Extradition Services LLC
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Finance [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Defendant: Sam Wright
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Finance [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Plaintiff: James Brian Wright
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Finance [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]

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?