Hicks v. State of Nevada et al
| Robert E. Hicks |
| Donald M. Mosley, Chad Mitchell, Edward B. Hughes, Thomas M. Carroll, David Roger and State of Nevada |
| 3:2014cv00352 |
| July 7, 2014 |
| US District Court for the District of Nevada |
| Reno Office |
| Valerie P. Cooke |
| Robert C. Jones |
| Prisoner: Civil Rights |
| 42 U.S.C. ยง 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights |
| None |
Follow case documents by RSS
Available Case Documents
The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing
25
ORDER REGARDING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS for 20 Report and Recommendation. IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the Report and Recommendation (ECF No. 20 ) is ADOPTED IN PART and REJECTED IN PART. The Motion to Proceed in Forma Pauperis (ECF No. 1 ) i s GRANTED, but the Complaint (ECF No. 1-2) is DISMISSED under 28 U.S.C. § 1915A, without leave to amend. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Clerk shall enter judgment and close the case. IT IS SO ORDERED. Signed by Judge Robert C. Jones. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - BLG) (Main Document 25 replaced unsigned order with signed order on 1/12/2015) (BLG).
|
|
Filing
22
ORDER adopting and accepting 20 Report and Recommendation; granting 1 MOTION/APPLICATION for Leave to Proceed in forma pauperis; directing clerk to file complaint; and dismissing complaint with leave to amend by 1/15/15. Signed by Judge Robert C. Jones on 1/9/15. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - JC)
|
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 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.
