Johnson v. Thomas et al
1:2005cv00655 |
November 9, 2005 |
US District Court for the Southern District of Alabama |
Mobile Office |
W. B. Hand |
Bert W. Milling |
Prison Condition |
42 U.S.C. ยง 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights |
None |
Available Case Documents
The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:
Document Text |
---|
Filing 50 REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS re MOTION for Summary Judgment filed by Levan Thomas be granted and that plaintiff's action against defendant Thomas be dismissed with prejudice. In addition, it is recommended that plaintiff's action against defendant Greg Pierce be dismissed without prejudice for failure to prosecute. Objections to R&R due by 2/21/2008. Signed by Magistrate Judge Bert W. Milling, Jr on 2/1/08. (srr) |
Filing 3 Order regarding the 1 1983 Complaint and 2 IFP Motion. This 1983 Complaint and IFP Motion was originally filed in 05-389-WS as Docs. 14 and 15. The Clerk was directed to refile this Complaint and Motion in a new civil action. The plaintiff is ordered to file an amended complaint as set out by 11/30/05. Disposition Deadline set to 11/30/2005. Signed by Judge William H. Steele on 11/8/05. Copy of order & 1983 complaint form mailed to pla. on 11/9/05.(tgw) |
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 Southern 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
Search for this case: Johnson v. Thomas et al | |
---|---|
Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
Search Web | [ Unicourt | 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.