Baker v. Drew (INMATE 3)
Plaintiff: William E. Baker, Jr.
Defendant: Darlene Drew
Case Number: 2:2007cv00622
Filed: July 6, 2007
Court: US District Court for the Middle District of Alabama
Office: Montgomery Office
County: Montgomery
Presiding Judge: Mark E. Fuller
Presiding Judge: Terry F. Moorer
Nature of Suit: Habeas Corpus (Prison Condition)
Cause of Action: 42 U.S.C. ยง 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
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
August 19, 2009 Opinion or Order Filing 29 MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER: 1. Defendant's motion for summary judgment is GRANTED. 2. Baker's complaint is DISMISSED with prejudice due to Baker's failure to properly exhaust his available administrative remedies. A final judgment shall be entered in favor of Defendant. Signed by Honorable Terry F. Moorer on 8/19/2009. (dmn)
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 Alabama Middle District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: Baker v. Drew (INMATE 3)
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Plaintiff: William E. Baker, Jr.
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: Darlene Drew
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?