Broadhead v. Terrell et al
| James M Broadhead |
| Raymond Gaines, A Marks, L Terrell, C Sutton and Officer, C/O John Rodens |
| 2:2019cv02030 |
| December 16, 2019 |
| US District Court for the Northern District of Alabama |
| John H England |
| R David Proctor |
| Prisoner Petition (Prison Condition) |
| 42 U.S.C. ยง 1983 |
| None |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on January 21, 2020. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing 3
ORDER OF DISMISSAL the Magistrate Judges report is hereby ADOPTED and the recommendation is ACCEPTED. Because Plaintiff failed to pay the filing and administrative fees of $400.00 at the time he filed this complaint, the court DISMISSES this action WITHOUT PREJUDICE. Plaintiff may initiate a new civil rights action by completing and filing a new civil rights complaint form and paying the filing and administrative fees of $400.00. Signed by Judge R David Proctor on 1/21/2020. (KAM)
|
| Filing 2 MAGISTRATE JUDGE'S REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION re #1 Complaint filed by James M Broadhead. Objections to R&R due within fourteen (14) calendar days from the date the Report and Recommendation is entered. Signed by Magistrate Judge John H England, III on 12/20/2019. (JLC) |
| Filing 1 COMPLAINT against Raymond Gaines, A Marks, John Rodens, C Sutton, L Terrell, filed by James M Broadhead.(KAM) |
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 Northern 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.
