Eads v. Cheney et al
| David Eads |
| Dr. Dave Cheney and Stanley Holden |
| 3:2023cv00047 |
| June 16, 2023 |
| U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Georgia |
| Dudley H Bowen |
| Brian K Epps |
| Prisoner - Prison Condition |
| 42 U.S.C. ยง 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights |
| Plaintiff |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on March 11, 2025. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing 7
ORDER directing service re #6 REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION. Signed by Magistrate Judge Brian K. Epps on 8/9/23. (loh)
|
| Filing 6 REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION of the U.S. Magistrate Judge that re #1 Complaint should be dismissed without prejudice and this civil action should be closed. Objections to R&R due by 8/28/2023. Signed by Magistrate Judge Brian K. Epps on 8/9/23. (loh) |
| Filing 5 Prisoner Trust Fund Account Statement by David Eads. (jlh) |
|
Filing 4
ORDER granting #2 Motion for Leave to Proceed in forma pauperis, subject to compliance with the conditions of this Order. PLRA due by 7/23/2023. Signed by Magistrate Judge Brian K. Epps on 06/23/2023. (Attachments: #1 PLRA Forms.) (jlh)
|
| Filing 3 Inmate Account Statement by David Eads. (wwp) |
| Filing 2 MOTION for Leave to Proceed in forma pauperis by David Eads. REFERRED to Judge Brian K. Epps.(wwp) |
| Filing 1 COMPLAINT against Dave Cheney, Stanley Holden, filed by David Eads.(wwp) |
Access additional case information on PACER
Use the links below to access additional information about this case on the U.S. 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.
