TAYLOR v. JOHNSON et al
| MARVIN TAYLOR |
| WARDEN JOHNSON, UNIT MANAGER DAUGHTRY and CORRECTIONAL OFFICER COOPER |
| 5:2020cv00296 |
| July 29, 2020 |
| US District Court for the Middle District of Georgia |
| STEPHEN HYLES |
| MARC T TREADWELL |
| Prisoner: Prison Condition |
| 42 U.S.C. ยง 1983 |
| None |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on September 17, 2020. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing 5
ORDER For Plaintiff to either pay the $400.00 filing fee or complete and return to the Court the proper non-prisoner application to proceed IFP. Failure to comply with this Order by October 2, 2020 will result in the dismissal without prejudice of this action. The Clerk's Office is DIRECTED to send a non-prisoner application to proceed IFP to Plaintiff along with a copy of this Order. Ordered by CHIEF DISTRICT JUDGE MARC T TREADWELL on 9/17/2020. (tam)
|
| US MAGISTRATE JUDGE STEPHEN HYLES no longer assigned to case. (vs) |
| Filing 4 Consent Form (28 USC 636(c)(1)) sent to MARVIN TAYLOR (vs) |
|
Filing 3
ORDER REFERRING CASE to Magistrate Judge issued at the direction of the Court. (vs)
|
| Filing 2 MOTION for Leave to Proceed in forma pauperis Filed by MARVIN TAYLOR. Motion(s) referred to STEPHEN HYLES.(vs) |
| Filing 1 COMPLAINT against All Defendants,filed by MARVIN TAYLOR. (Attachments: #1 Cover Letter, #2 Letter, #3 Envelope)(vs) |
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 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.
