Freeney v. Montgomery City (INMATE 1)

Plaintiff: Richard Barker Freeney
Defendant: Montgomery City
Case Number: 2:2010cv00404
Filed: May 10, 2010
Court: Alabama Middle District Court
Office: Montgomery Office
County: Montgomery
Presiding Judge: Ira De Ment
Nature of Suit: Prison Condition
Cause of Action: 42:1983
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
July 9, 2010 4 Opinion or Order of the Court OPINION AND ORDER directing that: 1) The 3 Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge is ADOPTED; and 2) This case be DISMISSED without prejudice for Plf's failure to provide the court with the necessary financial information in compliance with the orders of this court. Signed by Honorable Ira De Ment on 7/9/2010. (wcl, ) Modified on 7/9/2010 to correct the docket text to add Opinion (wcl, ).

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: Freeney v. Montgomery City (INMATE 1)
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Plaintiff: Richard Barker Freeney
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 [ Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Defendant: Montgomery City
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 [ 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?