Davis v. Saul
Plaintiff: Kimberlie Conley Davis
Defendant: Andrew M. Saul
Case Number: 4:2019cv00129
Filed: August 29, 2019
Court: US District Court for the Northern District of Mississippi
Presiding Judge: Michael P Mills
Referring Judge: Roy Percy
Nature of Suit: Social Security: DIWC/DIWW
Cause of Action: 42:405
Jury Demanded By: None
Docket Report

This docket was last retrieved on August 29, 2019. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.

Date Filed Document Text
August 29, 2019 NOTICE OF ASSIGNMENT. Case assigned to Judge Mills and Magistrate Judge Percy. (jwr)
August 29, 2019 Filing 2 MOTION to Proceed in forma pauperis by Kimberlie Conley Davis. (Attachments: #1 Application to Proceed in Forma Pauperis) (jwr)
August 29, 2019 Filing 1 COMPLAINT, filed by Kimberlie Conley Davis. (Attachments: #1 Civil Cover Sheet) (jwr)

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 Mississippi Northern District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: Davis v. Saul
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Defendant: Andrew M. Saul
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 [ Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Plaintiff: Kimberlie Conley Davis
Represented By: Sarah Lynn Dickey
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 [ 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?