Davis, Jr. v. Kott Law Firm

Davis, Jr. v. Kott Law Firm

Plaintiff:	Adam Davis, Jr.
Defendant:	Kott Law Firm
Case Number:	3:2018cv00623
Filed:	June 11, 2018
Court:	US District Court for the Middle District of Louisiana
Office:	Baton Rouge Office
Presiding Judge:	Shelly D. Dick
Presiding Judge:	Erin Wilder-Doomes
Nature of Suit:	Prisoner: Civil Rights
Cause of Action:	42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Jury Demanded By:	None

Follow case documents by RSS

Available Case Documents

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

Date Filed	Document Text
August 15, 2019	Filing 10 RULING Adopting 9 Report and Recommendation of the U.S. Magistrate Judge. This case is hereby DISMISSED without prejudice for lack of federal subject matter jurisdiction. The Clerk of Court send, via certified mail return receipt requested, and regular mail, a copy of this Ruling to Plaintiff at the address listed on PACER. Signed by Chief Judge Shelly D. Dick on 8/14/2019. (EDC)
May 22, 2019	Filing 5 NOTICE and ORDER: DENIED 2 MOTION to Proceed In Forma Pauperis. In the event Plaintiff wishes to proceed with prosecuting this suit in this Court, Plaintiff shall pay, within twenty-one (21) days of this Notice and Order, the $400.00 filing f ee and a Notice setting out the citizenship of Plaintiff and defendant, the Kott Law Firm. If Plaintiff does not wish to proceed with prosecuting this suit in this Court, Plaintiff shall file, within twenty-one (21) days of this Notice and Order, a Notice of Dismissal. Plaintiff is NOTIFIED that failure to timely comply with this Notice and Order may result in dismissal of this suit without further notice. Signed by Magistrate Judge Erin Wilder-Doomes on 5/22/2019. (EDC)

Date Filed

Document Text

August 15, 2019

Filing 10 RULING Adopting 9 Report and Recommendation of the U.S. Magistrate Judge. This case is hereby DISMISSED without prejudice for lack of federal subject matter jurisdiction. The Clerk of Court send, via certified mail return receipt requested, and regular mail, a copy of this Ruling to Plaintiff at the address listed on PACER. Signed by Chief Judge Shelly D. Dick on 8/14/2019. (EDC)

May 22, 2019

Filing 5 NOTICE and ORDER: DENIED 2 MOTION to Proceed In Forma Pauperis. In the event Plaintiff wishes to proceed with prosecuting this suit in this Court, Plaintiff shall pay, within twenty-one (21) days of this Notice and Order, the $400.00 filing f ee and a Notice setting out the citizenship of Plaintiff and defendant, the Kott Law Firm. If Plaintiff does not wish to proceed with prosecuting this suit in this Court, Plaintiff shall file, within twenty-one (21) days of this Notice and Order, a Notice of Dismissal. Plaintiff is NOTIFIED that failure to timely comply with this Notice and Order may result in dismissal of this suit without further notice. Signed by Magistrate Judge Erin Wilder-Doomes on 5/22/2019. (EDC)

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 Louisiana Middle District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: Davis, Jr. v. Kott Law Firm
Search News	[ Google News \| Marketwatch \| Wall Street Journal \| Financial Times \| New York Times ]
Search Web	[ Unicourt \| Legal Web \| Google \| Bing \| Yahoo \| Ask ]
Plaintiff: Adam Davis, Jr.
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: Kott Law Firm
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?