GATES v. BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE FLORIDA HIGH SCHOOL ATHLETIC ASSOCIATION et al
3:2006cv00555 |
December 13, 2006 |
US District Court for the Northern District of Florida |
Pensacola Office |
MILES DAVIS |
M CASEY RODGERS |
Civil Rights: Other |
42 U.S.C. ยง 1983 Civil Rights Act |
Plaintiff |
Available Case Documents
The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:
Document Text |
---|
Filing
4
ORDER re 1 Complaint, and 3 MOTION for Leave to Proceed in forma pauperis, filed by MICHELLE GATES - 1. Clerk to forward to pltf a civil rights complaint form (non-prisoner, 42 USC 1983), and a motion for leave to proceed informa paupe ris. This case number s/b written on the forms. 2. Pltf shall have thirty (30) days to file Amended Complaint, typed/clearly written on court forms and shall comply with instructions herein, including naming proper party plaintiff. 3. Pltf's motion to proceed in forma pauperis (doc.3) is DENIED without prejudice. She shall either pay the $350. filing fee or file new application to proceed "IFP" within thirty (30) days. Signed by Judge MILES DAVIS on December 22, 2006. (cbj) |
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 Florida 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
Search for this case: GATES v. BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE FLORIDA HIGH SCHOOL ATHLETIC ASSOCIATION 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.