Sulfridge v. Huff et al
Case Number: 3:2005cv00188
Filed: April 4, 2005
Court: US District Court for the Eastern District of Tennessee
Office: Civil Rights: Other Office
Presiding Judge: H Bruce Guyton
Presiding Judge: Thomas W Phillips
Nature of Suit: Defendant
Cause of Action: Federal Question
Jury Demanded By: 42:1983 Civil Rights Act

Available Case Documents

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

Date Filed Document Text
August 31, 2009 Opinion or Order Filing 234 JUDGMENT on Decision by the Court, entered by the Clerk, re (130 in 3:05-cv-00191) Memorandum Opinion in which the Honorable Thomas W. Phillips, United States District Judge, having found that plaintiffs have abandoned their case and demonstrated a failure to prosecute, whereby all claims against the defendants are dismissed. Associated Cases: 3:05-cv-00188, 3:05-cv-00191 (copies mailed to pro se plaintiffs) (AYB)
October 6, 2008 Opinion or Order Filing 219 ORDER DISMISSING CASE as plaintiffs have shown no desire to prosecute this action. The Clerk is directed to provide a copy of this Order to counsel for all parties of record and to plaintiff individually. Signed by District Judge Thomas W Phillips on October 6, 2008. (copies mailed to plaintiff Candice Sulfridge and Adam Davis c/o 145 Harvey Drive, Russellville, TN 37860 and to attorney Herb Moncier) Associated Cases: 3:05-cv-00188, 3:05-cv-00191 (AYB)
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 Tennessee Eastern District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: Sulfridge v. Huff et al
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | 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?