Hardy v. Comala Credit Union et al (INMATE 1)
| 2:2006cv00617 |
| July 14, 2006 |
| US District Court for the Middle District of Alabama |
| Montgomery Office |
| Charles S. Coody |
| Mark E. Fuller |
| Mandamus & Other |
| 42 U.S.C. ยง 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights |
| None |
Follow case documents by RSS
Available Case Documents
The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing
9
FINAL JUDGMENT that judgment is entered in favor of the defendants andagainst the plaintiff and that this action is dismissed with prejudice.The clerk of the court is directed to enter this document on the civil docket as a final judgment pursuant to Rule 58 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. Signed by Judge Mark E. Fuller on 8/1/2006. (Attachments: # 1 Civil Appeals Checklist)(cb, )
|
|
Filing
6
ORDER denying 5 Motion for Appointment of Counsel . Signed by Judge Charles S. Coody on 7/25/2006. (cb, )
|
|
Filing
4
ORDER directing Monthly Payments be made from Inmate's Prison Account until fee is paid in full; granting 2 Affidavit for Leave to Proceed in forma pauperis except to the extent payment is required under this order. Copies mailed to plaintiff and account clerk at Bullock County Correctional Facility. Signed by Judge Charles S. Coody on 7/18/06. (cb, )
|
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 Alabama Middle District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System
- Search for Party Aliases
- Associated Cases
- Attorneys
- Case File Location
- Case Summary
- Docket Report
- History/Documents
- Parties
- Related Transactions
- Check Status
| Search for this case: Hardy v. Comala Credit Union et al (INMATE 1) | |
|---|---|
| Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
| Search Web | [ Unicourt | 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.
