Williams v. Wilson
| Kevin Lamar Williams |
| Leah Ruth Wilson |
| 3:2019cv00497 |
| June 12, 2019 |
| US District Court for the Middle District of Tennessee |
| Eli J Richardson |
| Prisoner: Civil Rights |
| 42 U.S.C. ยง 1983 |
| Plaintiff |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on June 25, 2019. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Filing 6 ENTRY OF JUDGMENT re: #5 Order Dismissing Case, (xc:Pro se party by regular mail.) (mg) |
Filing 5
ORDER: Kevin Lamar Williams, a pre-trial detainee in the custody of the Davidson County Sheriff's Office in Nashville, Tennessee, filed this pro se action under 42 U.S.C. 1983 against Leah Ruth Wilson, his court-appointed defense attorney. (Doc. No. #1 ). Plaintiff also filed an application to proceed in forma pauperis. (Doc. No. #2 ). From a review of Plaintiff's application to proceed in forma pauperis, it appears that he lacks sufficient financial resources from which to pay the full filing fee in advance. Therefore, his application (Doc. No. #2 ) is GRANTED. Accordingly, Plaintiff is hereby assessed the full $350 filing fee. The Clerk of Court is DIRECTED send a copy of this Order to the administrator of inmate trust fund accounts at the Davidson County Sheriff's Office. The Court has reviewed the complaint pursuant to the PLRA and, for the reasons set forth in the Memorandum Opinion #4 entered contemporaneously with this Order, finds that the complaint fails to state Section 1983 claims upon which relief can be granted. Therefore, Plaintiff's Section 1983 claims against Defendant Leah Ruth Wilson are DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE. 28 U.S.C. 1915A. This is the final Order denying all relief in this case. The Clerk SHALL enter judgment. Fed. R. Civ. P. 58(b). Signed by District Judge Eli J. Richardson on 6/25/2019. (xc:Pro se party by regular mail as well as to the administrator of inmate trust fund accounts at the Davidson County Sheriff's Office.) (DOCKET TEXT SUMMARY ONLY-ATTORNEYS MUST OPEN THE PDF AND READ THE ORDER.)(mg)
|
| Filing 4 MEMORANDUM OPINION OF THE COURT. Signed by District Judge Eli J. Richardson on 6/25/2019. (xc:Pro se party by regular mail.) (DOCKET TEXT SUMMARY ONLY-ATTORNEYS MUST OPEN THE PDF AND READ THE ORDER.)(mg) |
| Filing 3 NOTICE/INFORMATION regarding Consent of the Parties to the Magistrate Judge. (afs) |
| (Notice mailed to pro se party regarding filing of new case (docket sheet & certificate of service form included). (afs) |
| Filing 2 APPLICATION for Leave to Proceed In Forma Pauperis by Kevin Lamar Williams. (afs) |
| Filing 1 COMPLAINT against Leah Ruth Wilson, filed by Kevin Lamar Williams.(afs) |
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 Middle 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
| Search for this case: Williams v. Wilson | |
|---|---|
| Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
| Search Web | [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ] |
| Plaintiff: Kevin Lamar Williams | |
| 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: Leah Ruth Wilson | |
| 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.
