King v. Winegardner et al
| James E. King, Jr. |
| S. Jones, Timothy M. Brady, Kurtis R. Winegardner and Unknown Clark |
| 4:2020cv01501 |
| October 16, 2020 |
| US District Court for the Eastern District of Missouri |
| Audrey G Fleissig |
| Prisoner: Civil Rights |
| 42 U.S.C. ยง 1983 |
| None |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on April 12, 2021. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Case Opening Notification: Judge Assigned: Honorable Audrey G. Fleissig. (DJO) |
| ***Complaint Letter Processed (see notice of electronic filing for distribution list) Mon Oct 19 13:01:54 CDT 2020 (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. (DJO) |
| Filing 4 Certified Inmate Account Statement by Plaintiff James E. King, Jr. (DJO) |
| Filing 3 MOTION for Leave to Proceed in forma pauperis under 42:1983 (prisoner) by Plaintiff James E. King, Jr. (DJO) |
| Filing 2 MOTION to Appoint Counsel by Plaintiff James E. King, Jr. (DJO) |
| Filing 1 PRISONER CIVIL RIGHTS COMPLAINT UNDER 42 U.S.C. 1983 against defendant Timothy M. Brady, Unknown Clark, S. Jones, Kurtis R. Winegardner Jury Demand,, filed by James E. King, Jr. (Attachments: #1 Exhibit, #2 Original Filing Form, #3 Civil Cover Sheet, #4 Judge Assignment Label, #5 Envelope)(DJO) |
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.
