RIDLEY v. HANCOCK
Petitioner: EDWARD TYRONE RIDLEY
Respondent: SHERIFF BILLY HANCOCK
Case Number: 1:2019cv00204
Filed: November 14, 2019
Court: US District Court for the Middle District of Georgia
Presiding Judge: LESLIE ABRAMS GARDNER
Referring Judge: THOMAS Q LANGSTAFF
Nature of Suit: Mandamus & Other
Cause of Action: 28 U.S.C. ยง 1361
Jury Demanded By: None
Docket Report

This docket was last retrieved on November 14, 2019. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.

Date Filed Document Text
November 14, 2019 Opinion or Order Filing 2 ORDER REFERRING CASE to Magistrate Judge issued at the direction of the Court. (bcl)
November 14, 2019 Filing 1 EMERGENCY PETITION for Writ of Mandamus Filed by EDWARD TYRONE RIDLEY. (Attachments: #1 Envelope). Motion(s) referred to THOMAS Q LANGSTAFF.(bcl)

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 Georgia Middle District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: RIDLEY v. HANCOCK
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Respondent: SHERIFF BILLY HANCOCK
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 ]
Petitioner: EDWARD TYRONE RIDLEY
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?