McDonald v. Epps
Plaintiff: Ronnie McDonald
Defendant: Christopher B. Epps
Case Number: 1:2014cv00116
Filed: March 7, 2014
Court: US District Court for the Southern District of Mississippi
Office: Southern Office
County: Greene
Presiding Judge: Michael T. Parker
Presiding Judge: Keith Starrett
Nature of Suit: General
Cause of Action: 28 U.S.C. ยง 2254
Jury Demanded By: None

Available Case Documents

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

Date Filed Document Text
October 15, 2014 Opinion or Order Filing 9 ORDER adopting Report and Recommendations 8 dismissing case without prejudice. A separate Judgment shall be entered as required by Rule 58 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. Signed by District Judge Keith Starrett on October 15, 2014 (dsl)
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 Southern District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: McDonald v. Epps
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Defendant: Christopher B. Epps
Represented By: Jim Hood
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 ]
Plaintiff: Ronnie McDonald
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?