Weaver v. Stringer et al
| Sierra D. Weaver |
| Richard Stringer, Arthur Ray Busby, Tina Parnell, Emil Delarosa, Jr. and Michael Blaine Barnett |
| 1:2018cv00052 |
| February 2, 2018 |
| US District Court for the Southern District of Alabama |
| Mobile Office |
| Mobile |
| Katherine P. Nelson |
| William H. Steele |
| Other Civil Rights |
| 42 U.S.C. ยง 1983 |
| Plaintiff |
Follow case documents by RSS
Available Case Documents
The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing
82
ORDER granting in part and denying in part 58 Motion for Attorney Fees, and 71 the Corrected Motion for Attorney Fees is DENIED, such that the law firm Capell & Howard PC is ORDERED to pay $7,265.70 to plaintiff. Capell & Howard is ORDERED to make this payment in full by 14 days from date of entry of this order, unless plaintiff agrees to a different arrangement. Signed by Magistrate Judge Katherine P. Nelson on 4/4/19. (srr)
|
|
Filing
64
Amended Order re: plaintiff's motions to compel (docs. 39,48,53,54) are GRANTED in part and DENIED in part as set out in order; defendants shall serve plaintiff with amended discovery responses in compliance with this order and file notice certifying same by 12/26/2018. Signed by Magistrate Judge Katherine P. Nelson on 12/18/18. (srr)
|
|
Filing
22
ORDER denying without prejudice 21 Motion to Compel Discovery. Signed by Magistrate Judge Katherine P. Nelson on 5/22/18. (srr)
|
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
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.
