McKenzie v. Apker
Plaintiff: Frederick McKenzie
Defendant: Craig Apker
Case Number: 1:2015cv00221
Filed: February 9, 2015
Court: US District Court for the Eastern District of California
Office: Fresno Office
County: Kern
Presiding Judge: Gary S. Austin
Nature of Suit: Civil Rights
Cause of Action: 28 U.S.C. ยง 1331
Jury Demanded By: None

Available Case Documents

The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:

Date Filed Document Text
June 11, 2015 Opinion or Order Filing 9 FINDINGS and RECOMMENDATIONS to dismiss case for failure to obey court orders 2 , 7 signed by Magistrate Judge Gary S. Austin on 6/11/2015. Referred to Judge Lawrence J. O'Neill; Objections to F&R due by 7/16/2015. (Lundstrom, T)
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 California Eastern District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: McKenzie v. Apker
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Plaintiff: Frederick McKenzie
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: Craig Apker
Represented By: Bureau of Prisons Regional Counsel
Represented By: Dale Patrick
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?