Messick v. Bryant et al
| Phillip Messick |
| Roger Bryant, Johnny L. Smith, Clark Schrader, Mike Smith, Tim Chatman and Randy Rigdon |
| 3:2022cv00021 |
| March 8, 2022 |
| US District Court for the Southern District of Georgia |
| Dudley H Bowen |
| Brian K Epps |
| Civil Rights: Other |
| 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act |
| Both |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on November 15, 2023. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing 18
ANSWER to Amended Complaint by Roger Bryant, Tim Chatman, Clark Schrader.(Hall, Jon)
|
|
Filing 17
ANSWER to Amended Complaint by Johnny L. Smith.(Havlik, Gwendolyn)
|
|
Set/Reset Deadlines: Randy Rigdon answer due 5/13/2022. (thb)
|
|
Filing 16
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT OF SERVICE Executed as to #15 Amended Complaint Acknowledgement filed by Randy Rigdon. (Havlik, Gwendolyn)
|
|
Filing 15
AMENDED COMPLAINT against Roger Bryant, Tim Chatman, Randy Rigdon, Clark Schrader, Johnny L. Smith, filed by Phillip Messick.(Walker, Emily)
|
|
Filing 14
ANSWER to Complaint by Roger Bryant, Tim Chatman, Clark Schrader.(Hall, Jon)
|
|
Filing 13
ORDER granting #10 Motion to Substitute Party; Granting #11 Motion for Extension of Time to Answer. Plaintiff shall have seven days from the date of this Order to file a complete amended complaint. Substituted party Randy Rigdon, in his individual capacity of Sheriff of Wheeler County, shall have twenty-one days from acknowledgment of service to answer, move, or otherwise respond to the amended complaint. Signed by Magistrate Judge Brian K. Epps on April 12, 2022. (jrb)
|
|
Set/Reset Deadlines: Amended Complaint due by 4/19/2022. (jrb)
|
|
Filing 12
Defenses and ANSWER to Complaint by Johnny L. Smith.(Havlik, Gwendolyn)
|
|
Filing 11
Consent MOTION for Extension of Time to File Answer re #6 Summons Returned Executed, #10 MOTION to Substitute Party Mike Smith by Mike Smith. Responses due by 4/25/2022. (Havlik, Gwendolyn)
|
|
MOTIONS REFERRED: #11 Consent MOTION for Extension of Time to File Answer re #6 Summons Returned Executed, #10 MOTION to Substitute Party Mike Smith. (JH)
|
|
Filing 10
MOTION to Substitute Party Mike Smith by Phillip Messick. Responses due by 4/21/2022. (Attachments: #1 Text of Proposed Order Proposed Order)(Walker, Emily)
|
|
MOTIONS REFERRED: #10 MOTION to Substitute Party Mike Smith. (JH)
|
|
Filing 9
NOTICE of Appearance by Kenneth E. Barton, III on behalf of Phillip Messick (Barton, Kenneth)
|
|
Filing 8
SUMMONS Returned Executed by Phillip Messick. Johnny L. Smith served on 3/23/2022, answer due 4/13/2022. (Walker, Emily)
|
|
Filing 7
SUMMONS Returned Executed by Phillip Messick. Clark Schrader served on 3/23/2022, answer due 4/13/2022. (Walker, Emily)
|
|
Filing 6
SUMMONS Returned Executed by Phillip Messick. Mike Smith served on 3/23/2022, answer due 4/13/2022. (Walker, Emily)
|
|
Filing 5
SUMMONS Returned Executed by Phillip Messick. Tim Chatman served on 3/23/2022, answer due 4/13/2022. (Walker, Emily)
|
|
Filing 4
SUMMONS Returned Executed by Phillip Messick. Roger Bryant served on 3/23/2022, answer due 4/13/2022. (Walker, Emily)
|
|
Filing 3
Summons Issued as to All Defendants. (csr)
|
|
Filing 2
RULE 26(f) ORDER. Signed by Magistrate Judge Brian K. Epps on 3/9/2022. (csr)
|
|
Filing 1
COMPLAINT against All Defendants, filed by Phillip Messick. $402.00 Filing Fee Paid; Receipt Number: AGASDC-3300542. (Attachments: #1 Civil Cover Sheet). (csr)
|
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 Southern 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.
