HAIRSTON v. HENDERSON

Plaintiff: BERKLEY E. HAIRSTON
Defendant: DOUG HENDERSON
Case Number: 1:2014cv00940
Filed: November 10, 2014
Court: US District Court for the Middle District of North Carolina
Office: NCMD Office
County: Guilford
Presiding Judge: CATHERINE C. EAGLES
Presiding Judge: JOE L. WEBSTER
Nature of Suit: Civil Rights
Cause of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Jury Demanded By: None

Available Case Documents

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

Date Filed Document Text
November 13, 2015 Filing 15 MEMORANDUM OPINION and RECOMMENDATION, signed by MAG/JUDGE JOE L. WEBSTER on 11/13/2015. RECOMMENDED that the court GRANT the Defendant Henderson's Motion to dismiss (Docket Entry 11 ), or alternatively, dismiss this case sua sponte for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. (Butler, Carol)
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 North Carolina Middle District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: HAIRSTON v. HENDERSON
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Plaintiff: BERKLEY E. HAIRSTON
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: DOUG HENDERSON
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?