Posten v. Alabama Department of Corrections et al (INMATE 2)
| Jeremy Charles Posten |
| Alabama Department of Corrections and Easterling Correctional Facility |
| 2:2022cv00258 |
| May 2, 2022 |
| US District Court for the Middle District of Alabama |
| Jerusha T Adams |
| W Harold Albritton |
| Habeas Corpus (Prison Condition) |
| 42 U.S.C. ยง 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights |
| None |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on July 25, 2022. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Filing 4 RECOMMENDATION OF THE MAGISTRATE JUDGE: the undersigned Magistrate Judge RECOMMENDS this case be DISMISSED without prejudice; Objections to R&R due by 7/15/2022. Signed by Honorable Judge Jerusha T. Adams on 6/30/2022. (amf, ) |
Filing 3
ORDER: it is ORDERED that by 5/20/2022, Plaintiff must submit an inmate account statement, as further set out in order; DIRECTING the Clerk to provide a copy of this Order to the inmate account clerk at the facility where Plaintiff is detained. Signed by Honorable Judge Jerusha T. Adams on 5/6/2022. (Copy mailed to Easterling CF Account Clerk as directed)(amf, )
|
| Filing 2 Application to Proceed Without Prepayment of Fees and Affidavit by Jeremy Charles Posten. (hrs, ) |
| Filing 1 Inmate 1983 COMPLAINT against Alabama Department of Corrections, Easterling Correctional Facility, filed by Jeremy Charles Posten.(hrs, ) |
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 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.
