Frost v. Carter et al
David Scott Frost |
Russell Eason, Lee Carter and Winston County Circuit Court |
5:2020cv00864 |
June 18, 2020 |
US District Court for the Northern District of Alabama |
Staci G Cornelius |
Abdul K Kallon |
Prisoner: Civil Rights |
42:1983 |
Plaintiff |
Docket Report
This docket was last retrieved on December 7, 2020. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
Document Text |
---|
Filing 5 NOTICE of Prisoner Consent Form #4 by David Scott Frost (MEB2) |
![]() |
Filing 3 MOTION for Leave to Proceed in forma pauperis by David Scott Frost. (AKD) |
Filing 2 NOTICE OF DEFICIENT PLEADING- The plaintiff failed to file an application to proceed in forma pauperis or pay the filing fee of $350 and administrative fee of $50. The plaintiff must either file an application to proceed in forma pauperis or pay a total of $400 ($350 filing fee + $50 administrative fee) to the Clerk of the Court within thirty (30) days. An application to proceed in forma pauperis must be signed by the plaintiff and must be accompanied by a certified copy of prison account statements for the last six months. The plaintiff must write 5:20-cv-00864-AKK-SGC at the top of the first page of the application to proceed in forma pauperis. Signed by Magistrate Judge Staci G Cornelius on 06/23/2020. (AKD) |
Filing 1 COMPLAINT against Lee Carter, Russell Eason, Winston County Circuit Court, filed by David Scott Frost.(AKD) |
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.