Todd v. Joyner
| Jerome Eugene Todd |
| US Department of Justice, Hampton County, Federal Bureau of Prisons, Hector Joyner, Charles E Peeples, United States of America and N C English |
| 6:2018cv03575 |
| December 26, 2018 |
| US District Court for the District of South Carolina |
| Kevin McDonald |
| Margaret B Seymour |
| Mandamus & Other |
| 28 U.S.C. ยง 1651 |
| None |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on January 24, 2019. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Filing 6 ***DOCUMENT MAILED #5 Proper Form Order, placed in U.S. Mail to Jerome Eugene Todd with IFP application (kric, ) Modified on 1/25/2019 to edit text (kric, ). |
Filing 5
PROPER FORM ORDER Case to be brought into proper form by 2/14/19. Add an additional 3 days only if served by mail or otherwise allowed under Fed. R. Civ. P. 6. The Clerk is directed to terminate from the docket the Federal Bureau of Prisons, The United States of America, the United States Department of Justice, Hampton County, Charles E. Peeples, and N C English, because a prisoner's custodian is the proper respondent in a habeas corpus action. IT IS SO ORDERED. Signed by Magistrate Judge Kevin McDonald on 1/24/19. (ctuc, )
|
| Filing 2 TRUE DIVISION FOR TRIAL: Beaufort. (kric, ) |
| Filing 1 PETITION for Writ of Coram Nobis, filed by Jerome Eugene Todd. (Attachments: #1 Supporting Documents, #2 Envelope)(kric, ) |
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 South Carolina 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.
