Hairston v. Lopez et al
| Derrick Lamar Hairston |
| M. Lopez and G. Ephion |
| 3:2024cv00443 |
| March 4, 2024 |
| US District Court for the Southern District of California |
| William Q Hayes |
| David D Leshner |
| Prisoner: Civil Rights |
| 42 U.S.C. ยง 1983 pr Prisoner Civil Rights |
| Plaintiff |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on March 25, 2024. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Filing 3 Transfer Letter Received from Central District of California. Case number in other court is 5:24cv00601 (All non-registered users served via U.S. Mail Service)(jpp) |
| Filing 2 Case transferred to District of UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA, EASTERN DIVISION. Files transferred electronically to: *District of UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA, EASTERN DIVISION*.*3470 TWELFTH STREET, 1ST FLOOR**RIVERSIDE, CA 92501-3801*. Signed by District Judge William Q. Hayes on 3/18/2024. (Attachments: #1 Transfer Order) (All non-registered users served via U.S. Mail Service)(alns) (jmo). |
| Filing 1 COMPLAINT with Jury Demand against G. Ephion, M. Lopez (Filing fee $ 405, Fee Not Paid, IFP Not Filed.), filed by Derrick Lamar Hairston. (Attachments: #1 Civil Cover Sheet)The new case number is 3:24-cv-443-WQH-DDL. Judge William Q. Hayes and Magistrate Judge David D. Leshner are assigned to the case.[Case in Screening per 28 USC 1915] (bdc) (jms). |
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 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.
