Ables v. Nelson et al
Plaintiff: Preston LeRoy Ables
Defendant: Bruce Nelson and Mike Ezell
Interested Party: Pro Se Department
Case Number: 1:2023cv00028
Filed: February 3, 2023
Court: US District Court for the Southern District of Mississippi
Presiding Judge: Halil S Ozerden
Referring Judge: Bradley W Rath
Nature of Suit: Prisoner Petitions - Prison
Cause of Action: 42 U.S.C. ยง 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Jury Demanded By: None
Docket Report

This docket was last retrieved on February 1, 2024. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.

Date Filed Document Text
March 27, 2023 Opinion or Order Filing 6 ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE: Show Cause Response due by 4/10/2023. Signed by Magistrate Judge Bradley W. Rath on 3/27/2023 (CLR)
February 28, 2023 Opinion or Order Filing 5 ORDER GRANTING EXTENSION OF TIME WITHIN WHICH TO RESPOND: Plaintiff shall fully comply with the Court's Order #3 on or before March 14, 2023. Signed by Magistrate Judge Bradley W. Rath on 2/28/2023 (CLR)
February 14, 2023 Opinion or Order Filing 4 AUTHORIZATION FOR RELEASE OF ACCOUNT INFORMATION AND CERTIFICATE by Preston LeRoy Ables (Attachments: #1 Envelope)(PKS)
February 3, 2023 Opinion or Order Filing 3 ORDER: on or before 3/6/2023, plaintiff shall either pay the required filing fee or file a completed application for leave to proceed in forma pauperis, specifically the section entitled Certificate to Be Completed by Authorized Officer of prisoner accounts or file an affidavit specifically stating the name of the prison official contacted concerning the Certificate and why this information is not provided to this court. Signed by Magistrate Judge Bradley W. Rath on 2/3/2023 (CLR)
February 3, 2023 Opinion or Order Filing 2 AUTHORIZATION FOR RELEASE OF ACCOUNT INFORMATION AND CERTIFICATE by Preston LeRoy Ables (Attachments: #1 Envelope)(JCH)
February 3, 2023 Opinion or Order Filing 1 COMPLAINT against Mike Ezell, Bruce Nelson, filed by Preston LeRoy Ables. (Attachments: #1 Notice of Assignment, #2 Envelope)(JCH)
February 3, 2023 Opinion or Order DOCKET ANNOTATION as to # 1 and # 2. Plaintiff is advised that future filings received should not have the pages cutoff on the sides and any forms should be legible and straight before sending in for filing. (JCH)

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: Ables v. Nelson et al
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Plaintiff: Preston LeRoy Ables
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: Bruce Nelson
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: Mike Ezell
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 ]
Interested party: Pro Se Department
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?