Shamus v. Corizen Medical Services et al
| Anthony Shamus |
| J. Cofield, Corizen Medical Services, Deborah Neff, Dr. Unknown Cabrera, Unknown McCullem, Maureen Banocy, T. Bredeman, Debora Steinman and Unknown Crouch |
| 2:2019cv00086 |
| November 14, 2019 |
| US District Court for the Eastern District of Missouri |
| Ronnie L White |
| Prisoner: Civil Rights |
| 42 U.S.C. ยง 1983 |
| Plaintiff |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on November 15, 2019. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Case Opening Notification: Judge Assigned: Honorable Ronnie L. White. (DLB) |
| ***Complaint Letter Processed (see notice of electronic filing for distribution list) Fri Nov 15 13:01:04 CST 2019 (admin,) |
| ***Complaint Letter Created. This is to advise you that this office has received and filed your complaint and has assigned it the above-referenced case number. (DLB) |
| Filing 3 Certified Inmate Account Statement by Plaintiff Anthony Shamus. (DLB) |
| Filing 2 MOTION for Leave to Proceed in forma pauperis under 42:1983 (prisoner) by Plaintiff Anthony Shamus. (DLB) |
| Filing 1 COMPLAINT against defendant Maureen Banocy, T. Bredeman, Unknown Cabrera, J. Cofield, Corizen Medical Services, Unknown Crouch, Unknown McCullem, Deborah Neff, Debora Steinman Jury Demand,, filed by Anthony Shamus. (Attachments: #1 Envelope, #2 Judge Assignment Label)(DLB) |
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 Missouri Eastern 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.
