Johnson v. Giles et al (INMATE2)
| David Lamar Johnson |
| J. C. Giles, Lewis Hulett, Sgt. Cross and Matthew Davidson |
| 2:2009cv00067 |
| January 27, 2009 |
| US District Court for the Middle District of Alabama |
| Habeas Corpus (Prison Condition) Office |
| Barbour |
| Wallace Capel |
| Myron H. Thompson |
| Plaintiff |
| Federal Question |
| 42:1983 Prisoner Civil Rights |
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
79
ORDER that the final judgment of this court made and entered on September 21, 2011 69 , is continued in full force and effect. Signed by Honorable Judge Myron H. Thompson on 4/2/2013. (jg, )
|
|
Filing
46
ORDERED as follows: (1) The 44 Motion to Recuse is denied and (2) This cause is referred back to the United States Magistrate Judge for further appropriate proceedings. Signed by Honorable Myron H. Thompson on 7/17/2009. (cb, )
|
|
Filing
9
ORDER directing payment of initial partial filing fee of $3.00 be paid on or before 2/24/2009; Directing Monthly Payments be made from Inmate's Prison Account until fee is paid in full; granting 6 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 Ventress Correctional Facility. Signed by Honorable Wallace Capel, Jr on 2/3/2009. (wcl, )
|
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
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.
