Qualls v. Roache et al
| Ronnie Qualls |
| Francis Roache, Daniel Keeler, Kenneth Taylor, Dennis Harris, Timothy Murray, David Perez, John Harden, Clifton Hayes and City of Boston |
| 1:2023cv10435 |
| February 23, 2023 |
| US District Court for the District of Massachusetts |
| George A OToole |
| Civil Rights: Other |
| 42 U.S.C. ยง 1983 Civil Rights Act |
| Plaintiff |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on March 28, 2024. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing 3
Summons Issued as to All Defendants. Counsel receiving this notice electronically should download this summons, complete one for each defendant and serve it in accordance with Fed.R.Civ.P. 4 and LR 4.1. Summons will be mailed to plaintiff(s) not receiving notice electronically for completion of service. (Kelly, Danielle)
|
|
Filing 2
ELECTRONIC NOTICE of Case Assignment. Judge George A. OToole, Jr assigned to case. If the trial Judge issues an Order of Reference of any matter in this case to a Magistrate Judge, the matter will be transmitted to Magistrate Judge M. Page Kelley. (Finn, Mary)
|
|
Filing 1
COMPLAINT against All Defendants Filing fee: $ 402, receipt number AMADC-9732112 (Fee Status: Filing Fee paid), filed by Ronnie Qualls. (Attachments: #1 Civil Cover Sheet, #2 Category Form)(Raycroft, Kelsey) Modified on 2/23/2023: Corrected docket text (Kelly, Danielle).
|
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 Massachusetts 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.
