Baker v. Alabama Department of Mental Health et al
| Jonathan Baker |
| Alabama Department of Mental Health, Humphrey and . Archibald |
| 7:2021cv01436 |
| October 26, 2021 |
| US District Court for the Northern District of Alabama |
| R David Proctor |
| Civil Rights: Other |
| 42 U.S.C. ยง 1983 |
| Plaintiff |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on February 10, 2023. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing 3
TEXT ORDER - This matter is before the court on Plaintiff's Motion for Service by Private Process Server #2 . Plaintiff requests the court allow for service by a private process server without addressing why service may not be effectuated by other means allowable under the Federal Rules. Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 4(c)(2) provides that "[a]ny person who is at least 18 years old and not a party may serve a summons and complaint." Thus, Plaintiff's motion #2 is ADMINISTRATIVELY TERMINATED as MOOT. Signed by Judge R David Proctor on 10/28/2021. (KEK)
|
|
Filing Fee: Filing fee $ 402, receipt_number 1126-3951797 (ALND B4601116572) related document #1 COMPLAINT against Alabama Department of Mental Health,. Archibald, Humphrey, filed by Jonathan Baker.(KAM). (Comer, James) Modified on 10/28/2021 (KEK).
|
|
Filing 2
MOTION for service by private process server by Jonathan Baker. (KAM)
|
|
Filing 1
COMPLAINT against Alabama Department of Mental Health,. Archibald, Humphrey, filed by Jonathan Baker.(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.
