Gaddis v. Spencer et al
Plaintiff: Thomas Gaddis
Defendant: Kenneth Spencer, Darryl Green and David Randall
Case Number: 2:2023cv00458
Filed: April 11, 2023
Court: US District Court for the Northern District of Alabama
Presiding Judge: Staci G Cornelius
Referring Judge: Anna M Manasco
Nature of Suit: Civil Rights: Other
Cause of Action: 42 U.S.C. ยง 1983 Civil Rights Act
Jury Demanded By: Plaintiff
Docket Report

This docket was last retrieved on May 25, 2023. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.

Date Filed Document Text
May 25, 2023 Filing 6 NOTICE OF REASSIGNMENT: The parties having not unanimously consented to the dispositive jurisdiction by a Magistrate Judge, the above styled civil action has been randomly reassigned to the Honorable Anna M. Manasco. Magistrate Judge Staci G Cornelius no longer assigned to the case. (KAM)
May 24, 2023 Opinion or Order Filing 5 ORDER REASSIGNING CASE The undersigned lacks authority to take further action. Accordingly, the case is now due to be assigned to a district judge for all further proceedings. The Clerk is DIRECTED to reassign this case to a district judge randomly drawn. Signed by Magistrate Judge Staci G Cornelius on 5/24/2023. (CTF)
April 19, 2023 Opinion or Order Filing 4 ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE AND ORDER TO AMEND Mr. Gaddis is ORDERED, within 30 calendar days of the date of this order, to: (1) SHOW CAUSE in writing why this matter should not be dismissed for lack of jurisdiction; and (2) FILE an amended complaint in accordance with the instructions provided above. The Clerk of Court is DIRECTED to provide the plaintiff with a copy of this order. Signed by Magistrate Judge Staci G Cornelius on 04/19/2023. (CTF)
April 12, 2023 Filing 3 NOTICE OF ASSIGNMENT of a case to a U. S. magistrate judge for trial. Sent to plaintiff via U. S. First Class Mail. (CTF)
April 11, 2023 Filing 2 MOTION for Leave to Proceed in forma pauperis Motion is RIPE 4/11/2023. Any party may file a motion to reconsider within three (3) business days of a ruling on the motion. Filed by Thomas Gaddis. Received for review on March 30, 2023. (CTF)
April 11, 2023 Filing 1 COMPLAINT against Darryl Green, David Randall, Kenneth Spencer, filed by Thomas Gaddis, received for review on March 30, 2023. (CTF)

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 this case: Gaddis v. Spencer et al
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Plaintiff: Thomas Gaddis
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 [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Defendant: Kenneth Spencer
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 [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Defendant: Darryl Green
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 [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Defendant: David Randall
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 [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | 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?