Murdock v. Thompson et al
Available Case Documents
The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:
|Date Filed||#||Document Text|
|September 25, 2018
ORDER Denying 16 Pro Se Motion for Reconsideration/ Opposition to Defendants Motion to Dismiss and Denying 17 Pro Se Motion to Amend. Plaintiff is granted leave to file a superseding Amended Complaint by October 12, 2018, as stated in according with this Order and all applicable rules and procedures. Signed by Chief Judge Frank D. Whitney on 9/25/2018. (Pro se litigant served by US Mail.)(jaw)
|August 14, 2018
ORDER Plaintiffs § 1983 claims against Defendants Houser, Thompson, Mabry, McAllister, and Paul for infringing his right to send and receive mail survive initial review under 28 U.S.C. § 1915. The remaining claims ar e dismissed pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B)(i) and (ii). Plaintiff shall have 14 days in which to file a superseding Amended Complaint in accordance with this Order and all applicable rules and procedures. If Plaintiff fails to file an Ame nd Complaint within the time limit set by the Court, this action will proceed on the original Complaint, (Doc. No. 1). The Clerk is directed to mail a copy of the Complaint, (Doc. No. 1), and a new Section 1983 complaint form to Plaintiff. IT IS FURT HER ORDERED THAT the Clerk of Court shall commence the procedure for waiver of service as set forth in Local Rule 4.3 for Defendants Houser, Thompson, Mabry, McAllister, and Paul who are current or former employees of NC DPS. Signed by Chief Judge Frank D. Whitney on 8/13/18. (Pro se litigant served by US Mail.)(clc)
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 Western District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System
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?