Stephens v. Georgia Department of Transportation et al
| Raymond Stephens, Sr. |
| Georgia Department of Transportation and State of Georgia |
| 5:2008cv00219 |
| July 7, 2008 |
| US District Court for the Middle District of Georgia |
| Civil Rights: Jobs Office |
| Baker |
| C. Ashley Royal |
| None |
| Federal Question |
| 42:2003 Job Discrimination |
Follow case documents by RSS
Available Case Documents
The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing
51
ORDER VACATING 50 Order on Motion for Leave to Appeal in forma pauperis and DENYING without prejudice 47 MOTION for Leave to Appeal in forma pauperis filed by Raymond Stephens, Sr. If plaintiff wishes to proceed with his appeal, he must pay the entire $455.00 appellate filing fee, or he may have one opportunity to amend his Motion to conform to the standards set out by Fed. R. App. Proc. 24(a). Ordered by Judge Marc Thomas Treadwell on 12/13/2010. (tlh)
|
|
Filing
50
ORDER DENYING 47 Motion for Leave to Appeal in forma pauperis. Ordered by Judge Marc Thomas Treadwell on 12/9/2010. (tlh)
|
|
Filing
42
ORDER GRANTING 37 Motion for Summary Judgment. Ordered by Judge Marc Thomas Treadwell on 9/9/2010. (tlh)
|
|
Filing
35
ORDER denying as moot 25 Motion for Default Judgment; granting in part and denying in part 19 Motion to Dismiss. Plaintiff's claims against Defendants Harmon, Griswold, Hill and Ford are dismissed. Ordered by Judge C. Ashley Royal on 11/4/09 (lap)
|
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 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.
