Chambers v. Temple et al (INMATE 2)
| Terry Lee Chambers |
| Charles Temple, Phelix Woods and Don Hutto |
| 2:2011cv00025 |
| January 11, 2011 |
| US District Court for the Middle District of Alabama |
| Montgomery Office |
| Barbour |
| Charles S. Coody |
| Ira De Ment |
| Civil Rights |
| 42 U.S.C. ยง 1983 |
| 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
25
ORDER denying 23 Motion to Appoint Counsel ; to the extent the pleading may be considered to contain a motion to subpoena witnesses, the 23 Motion is DENIED; directing the clerk to make a copy of the unofficial transcript attached to 23 , page 6 and return the original copy to plaintiff. Signed by Honorable Charles S. Coody on 3/25/11. (djy, )
|
|
Filing
22
ORDER denying 16 Motion for Reconsideration, as further set out in order. Signed by Honorable Ira De Ment on 3/23/11. (djy, )
|
|
Filing
14
ORDER denying 12 Motion for Temporary restraining order. Signed by Honorable Ira De Ment on 2/22/11. (Attachments: # 1 civil appeals checklist) (djy, )
|
|
Filing
5
ORDER granting 2 & 4 motions for Leave to Proceed in forma pauperis; Directing Monthly Payments be made from Inmate's Prison Account until fee is paid in full; Copies mailed to plaintiff and account clerk @ Easterling Correctional Facility. Signed by Honorable Charles S. Coody on 11/27/11. Furnished to cashier. (djy, )
|
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.
