SANDERS v. FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS et al
| DARYL A SANDERS |
| FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS and STASIA WARREN |
| 3:2021cv04766 |
| December 22, 2021 |
| US District Court for the Northern District of Florida |
| HOPE T CANNON |
| M CASEY RODGERS |
| Mandamus & Other |
| 28 U.S.C. ยง 1651 |
| None |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on April 22, 2022. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Filing 3 REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION re #1 MOTION for Writ of Mandamus filed by DARYL A SANDERS - It is recommended that: This case be DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE for Plaintiff's abuse of the judicial process and because he is a three-striker under 28 U.S.C. 1915(g). The clerk be directed to close this file. Signed by MAGISTRATE JUDGE HOPE T CANNON on 01/12/22. R&R flag set. Internal deadline for referral to district judge if objections are not filed earlier: 2/09/2022. (jfj) Modified objections deadline on 1/26/2022 (jfj). |
| Filing 2 Notice to Pro Se Litigant. (jfj) |
| ACTION REQUIRED BY MAGISTRATE JUDGE: Chambers of MAGISTRATE JUDGE HOPE T CANNON notified that action is needed Re: #1 PETITION for WRIT of MANDAMUS MOTION to INVOKE 42 U.S.C.S. 1983 by DARYL A SANDERS. Referred to HOPE T CANNON. (jfj) |
| Filing 1 PETITION for WRIT of MANDAMUS MOTION to INVOKE 42 U.S.C.S. 1983 by DARYL A SANDERS. (jfj) |
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 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
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.
