Crowl v. Chatham County Sheriffs Department et al
| Elliott Marshall Crowl |
| Chatham County Sheriffs Department and Nevils |
| 4:2021cv00073 |
| March 15, 2021 |
| US District Court for the Southern District of Georgia |
| R Stan Baker |
| Christopher L Ray |
| Prisoner - Prison Condition |
| 42 U.S.C. ยง 1983 |
| None |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on April 9, 2021. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Filing 8 Letter from Elliott Marshall Crowl. (ca) |
| Filing 7 CONSENT by Prisoner Elliott Marshall Crowl to collection of fees. (ca) |
| Filing 6 Prisoner Trust Fund Account Statement by Elliott Marshall Crowl. (ca) |
Filing 4
ORDER granting #2 Motion for Leave to Proceed in forma pauperis. Plaintiff must return the attached forms within 14 days from service of this Order. PLRA due by 3/31/2021. Signed by Magistrate Judge Christopher L. Ray on 3/16/2021. (Attachments: #1 PLRA Forms) (pts)
|
|
Filing 3
ORDER re Magistrate Assignment as to Chatham County Sheriffs Department, Nevils. Plaintiff Statement Re Assignment Due on 3/29/2021. Signed by District Judge R. Stan Baker on 3/15/2021. (Attachments: #1 Party's Statement) (ca)
|
| Filing 2 MOTION for Leave to Proceed in forma pauperis by Elliott Marshall Crowl. REFERRED to Judge Christopher L. Ray.(ca) |
| Filing 1 COMPLAINT against All Defendants, filed by Elliott Marshall Crowl.(ca) |
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.
