Epps v. Hein et al
Plaintiff: Harvey Epps
Defendant: Jeffrey S. Hein and Lisa Boyd
Case Number: 4:2016cv00100
Filed: May 2, 2016
Court: US District Court for the Southern District of Georgia
Office: Savannah Office
County: Liberty
Presiding Judge: G. R. Smith
Presiding Judge: William T. Moore
Nature of Suit: Prison Condition
Cause of Action: 42 U.S.C. ยง 1983
Jury Demanded By: None

Available Case Documents

The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:

Date Filed Document Text
July 27, 2017 Opinion or Order Filing 28 CLERK'S JUDGMENT dismissing the case with prejudice. (wwp)
August 17, 2016 Opinion or Order Filing 8 ORDER directing the Clerk to forward a copy of the 1 Complaint filed by Harvey Epps, 6 Order, the 7 AMENDED complaint and this Order to the Marshal for service upon all defendants. Signed by Magistrate Judge G. R. Smith on 8/17/16. (wwp)
June 7, 2016 Opinion or Order Filing 6 ORDER that Epps' RLUIPA and nutrition claims would survive preliminary review if he included additional facts. He thus has leave to amend his Complaint, within 30 days of the date this Order is served, to include allegations relating to the sinc erity of his Rastafarian beliefs, and to demonstrate deliberate indifference to his nutritional needs. Regardless of whether he amends, Epps dental deprivation and sanitary conditions claims should be DENIED for the reasons given above. Meanwhile, it is time for Epps to pay his filing fee. His PLRApaperwork reflects $32.83 in average monthly deposits and a $1 average monthly balance over the six month period prior to the date of his Prison Account Statement. Doc. 9. He therefore owes a $6.57 initial partialfiling fee. See 28 U.S.C. § 1915(b) (1) (requiring an initial fee assessmentwhen funds exist, under a specific 20 percent formula). Plaintiffs custodian (or designee) shall remit the $6.57 and shall set aside 20 p ercent of all future deposits to his account, then forward those funds to the Clerk each time the set aside amount reaches $10.00, until the balance of the Court's $350.00 filing fee has been paid in full. Also, the Clerk is DIRECTED t o send this Order to plaintiff's account custodian immediately, as this payment directive is non dispositive within the meaning of Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(a), so no Rule 72(b) adoption is required. In the event plaintiff is transferred to another ins titution, his present custodian shall forward a copy of this Order and all financial information concerning payment of the filing fee and costs in this case to plaintiff's new custodian. Signed by Magistrate Judge G. R. Smith on 6/6/16. (wwp) Modified on 6/7/2016 (wwp).
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 this case: Epps v. Hein et al
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Plaintiff: Harvey Epps
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 ]
Defendant: Jeffrey S. Hein
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 ]
Defendant: Lisa Boyd
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?