Holmes Vs. John Doe, Warden, et.al.
Plaintiff: Armstrong Holmes
Defendant: John Doe
Case Number: 3:2008cv00564
Filed: April 20, 2009
Court: US District Court for the District of Nevada
Office: Prisoner: Civil Rights Office
County: Carson City
Presiding Judge:
Presiding Judge: Larry R. Hicks
Presiding Judge: Robert A. McQuaid
Nature of Suit: None
Cause of Action: Federal Question
Jury Demanded By: 42:1983 Prisoner Civil Rights

Available Case Documents

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

Date Filed Document Text
March 3, 2010 Opinion or Order Filing 24 JUDGMENT - P's 23 First Amended Complaint is DISMISSED with prejudice for failure to state a claim upon which relief may be granted. Signed by Lance S. Wilson on 3/3/2010. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - DRM) Modified on 3/3/2010 to correct signature (DRM).
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 Nevada District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: Holmes Vs. John Doe, Warden, 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: Armstrong Holmes
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: John Doe
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?