Walton v. St. Louis City Police Department et al
| DeAndre Walton |
| St. Louis City Police Department, Brandon Wyms and Terron Murphy |
| 4:2024cv00298 |
| February 26, 2024 |
| US District Court for the Eastern District of Missouri |
| Sarah E Pitlyk |
| Prisoner: Civil Rights |
| 42 U.S.C. ยง 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights |
| Plaintiff |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on April 5, 2024. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Filing 4 SUPPLEMENTAL re #3 Amended Complaint by Plaintiff DeAndre Walton. (received from Cape office 4-15-2024) (KRZ) |
| Filing 3 AMENDED COMPLAINT against defendant Terron Murphy, St. Louis City Police Department, Brandon Wyms Amendment to #1 Complaint, filed by DeAndre Walton. Related document: #1 Complaint filed by DeAndre Walton.(KEK) |
| ***Complaint Letter Processed (see notice of electronic filing for distribution list) Tue Feb 27 11:00:56 CST 2024 (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. (JKL) |
| Case Opening Notification. Judge Assigned: Honorable Sarah E. Pitlyk. (JKL) |
| Filing 2 MOTION for Leave to Proceed in forma pauperis by Plaintiff DeAndre Walton. (JKL) |
| Filing 1 COMPLAINT against defendant All Defendants Jury Demand,, filed by DeAndre Walton. (Attachments: #1 Envelope)(JKL) |
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.
