Williams v. FBI et al
| President Thomas C. Williams |
| NY State Troopers and FBI |
| 3:2024cv01090 |
| September 10, 2024 |
| US District Court for the Northern District of New York |
| David N Hurd |
| Miroslav Lovric |
| Contract: Other |
| 28 U.S.C. ยง 1331 Fed. Question |
| None |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on September 10, 2024. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Filing 5 MOTION to Appoint Counsel filed by Thomas C. Williams, Pro Se. Motions referred to Miroslav Lovric. {Filed in Binghamton ROC} (kck) |
| Filing 4 Pro Se MOTION for Permission to File Electronically in ECF filed by Thomas C. Williams. Motions referred to Miroslav Lovric. {Filed in Binghamton ROC} (kck) |
| Filing 3 PRO SE HANDBOOK and NOTICE issued. {Plaintiff has stated they have a copy of the Pro Se Handbook and Local Rules, Clerk has served copy of Pro Se Notice upon Plaintiff via regular mail} (kck) |
| Filing 2 MOTION for Leave to Proceed in forma pauperis filed by Thomas C. Williams, Pro Se. Motions referred to Miroslav Lovric. (Attachments: #1 Proposed Summons as to Plaintiff Thomas C. Williams, #2 Proposed USM-285 Forms) {Filed in Binghamton ROC} (kck) |
| Filing 1 COMPLAINT against FBI and NY State Troopers filed by Thomas C. Williams, Pro Se. (Attachments: #1 Exhibit 1, #2 Exhibit 2, #3 Civil Cover Sheet) {Filed in Binghamton ROC} (kck) |
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 New York Northern 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.
