Smith v. Schoefield et al
| Terrance B Smith |
| Derrick Schoefield, David Sexton, S Cantrell, James Spall and Heather Lee |
| 3:2015cv00574 |
| December 28, 2015 |
| US District Court for the Eastern District of Tennessee |
| Knoxville Office |
| Morgan |
| H Bruce Guyton |
| Pamela L Reeves |
| Civil Rights |
| 42 U.S.C. ยง 1983 |
| Plaintiff |
Follow case documents by RSS
Available Case Documents
The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing
5
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER: Plaintiff's application to proceed without prepayment of fees [Doc. 2 ] is GRANTED. Nonetheless, because Plaintiff is an inmate, he is ASSESSED the filing fee of three hundred and fifty dollars ($ 350). To ensure compliance with the fee-collection procedure, the Clerk is DIRECTED to mail a copy of this order to the custodian of inmate accounts at the institution where Plaintiff is now confined. The Clerk is also DIRECTED to furnish a copy o f this order to the Court's financial deputy. Accordingly, Defendants Schoefield, Sexton, and Cantrell are, therefore, DISMISSED as parties in this suit. Based on the Court's dismissal of Plaintiff's claims, the Court finds Plaintif f's motion to appoint counsel is DENIED AS MOOT. the Court finds that Plaintiff's contentions fail to state § 1983 claims against Defendants and therefore, this case will be DISMISSED sua sponte in its entirety. Signed by District Judge Pamela L Reeves on 2/1/16. (c/m to Plaintiff, custodian of inmate accounts and Court's financial deputy) (JBR)
|
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 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.
