Deshields Jr. v. Maryland Department of Public Safety and Correctional Services et al
| Deon Deshields Jr. |
| Dr. Michael Peter Grant, Maryland Department of Public Safety and Correctional Services, Jama Acuff, University of Maryland Medical Center, Charles Mitchell and Jessup Correctional Institution |
| 1:2024cv02984 |
| October 11, 2024 |
| US District Court for the District of Maryland |
| James K Bredar |
| Prisoner: Civil Rights |
| 42 U.S.C. ยง 1983 pr Prisoner Civil Rights |
| Plaintiff |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on November 14, 2024. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing 4
ORDER granting #2 Motion for Leave to Proceed in forma pauperis; granting DeShields 28 days from the date of this Order to file an Amended Complaint. Signed by Judge James K Bredar on 11/14/2024. (c/m 11/14/2024 - bw5s, Deputy Clerk)
|
| Filing 3 New Case Notification Letter sent to Deon Deshields Jr.. (c/m 10/15/24 to P - jh6s, Deputy Clerk) |
| Filing 2 MOTION for Leave to Proceed in forma pauperis by Deon Deshields Jr.(jh6s, Deputy Clerk) |
| Filing 1 COMPLAINT against Jama Acuff, Dr. Michael Peter Grant, Jessup Correctional Institution, Maryland Department of Public Safety and Correctional Services, Charles Mitchell and University of Maryland Medical Center, filed by Deon Deshields Jr. (Attachments: #1 Civil Cover Sheet, #2 Summons)(jh6s, Deputy Clerk) |
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 Maryland 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.
