Rice v. Freesemann et al
Charles Vincent Rice |
ADA Nancy Greysmith, P.D. Robert Warren Attridge, Jr., District Attorney Meg Daly Heap, Chatham County, Judge Penny Haas Freesemann and State Of Georgia |
4:2020cv00212 |
September 8, 2020 |
US District Court for the Southern District of Georgia |
R Stan Baker |
Christopher L Ray |
Prisoner - Prison Condition |
42 U.S.C. ยง 1983 |
Plaintiff |
Docket Report
This docket was last retrieved on October 16, 2020. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
Document Text |
---|
Filing 7 ORDER denying #2 Motion for Leave to Proceed in forma pauperis; Dismissing re #1 COMPLAINT. The Clerk of Court is DIRECTED to CLOSE this case. Signed by Magistrate Judge Christopher L. Ray on 10/16/20. (loh) |
Filing 5 NOTICE of Filing Deficiency re #2 MOTION for Leave to Proceed in forma pauperis. (JH) |
Set/Reset Deadlines: Compliance due by 9/23/2020. (JH) |
Filing 4 ORDER re Magistrate Assignment. Plaintiff Statement Re Assignment Due on 9/22/2020. Signed by District Judge R. Stan Baker on 9/8/2020. (Attachments: #1 Statement Form) (pts) |
Filing 3 Inmate Account Statement by Charles Vincent Rice. (pts) |
Filing 2 MOTION for Leave to Proceed in forma pauperis by Charles Vincent Rice. REFERRED to Judge Christopher L. Ray.(pts) (Additional attachment(s) added on 9/22/2020: #1 Signature Page) (JH). |
Filing 1 COMPLAINT against All Defendants, filed by Charles Vincent Rice.(pts) |
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.