Robinson v. Bunn et al
| Jesse Zachary Robinson |
| David Bunn and Andy Dickson |
| 1:2022cv01072 |
| April 21, 2022 |
| US District Court for the Western District of Tennessee |
| Samuel H Mays |
| Tu M Pham |
| Prisoner: Civil Rights |
| 42 U.S.C. ยง 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights |
| Plaintiff |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on December 16, 2022. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Filing 7 Mail Returned as Undeliverable. Mail sent to Jesse Robinson. (skc) |
| Filing 6 Docket sheet mailed upon case opening Returned as Undeliverable. (mbm) |
Filing 5
ORDER granting #2 Motion for Leave to Proceed in forma pauperis and assessing $350.00 filing fee in accordance with PLRA, signed by Judge Samuel H. Mays, Jr. on 04/25/2022. (Mays, Samuel)
|
| Filing 4 NOTICE OF CASE TRACKING ASSIGNMENT PURSUANT TO LOCAL RULE 16.2: Pursuant to Local Rule 16.2, this case has been assigned to the Pro Se Prisoner track. http://www.tnwd.uscourts.gov/pdf/content/LocalRules.pdf (mbm) |
| Filing 3 MOTION to Appoint Counsel by Jesse Zachary Robinson. (Attachments: #1 envelope)(mbm) |
| Filing 2 MOTION for Leave to Proceed in forma pauperis by Jesse Zachary Robinson. (Attachments: #1 trust acct. info., #2 envelope)(mbm) |
| Filing 1 PRO SE COMPLAINT against All Defendants, filed by Jesse Zachary Robinson. (Attachments: #1 envelope)(mbm) (Additional attachment(s) added on 4/21/2022: #2 judges cards) (agj). |
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 Western 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.
