Taylor v. Wardlow et al
| Curtis Taylor |
| Jerry Wardlow, Purtle, Olsburn and Williams |
| 1:2024cv01028 |
| January 26, 2024 |
| 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 |
| None |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on February 22, 2024. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing 6
ORDER Directing Plaintiff to Comply with 28 U.S.C. 1915(A)(1)-(2) or Pay the Entire $405 Civil Filing Fee. Signed by Judge Samuel H. Mays, Jr. on February 22, 2024. (Mays, Samuel)
|
| Filing 5 MOTION to Appoint Counsel by Curtis Taylor. (Attachments: #1 envelope)(skc) |
| Filing 4 MOTION for Preliminary Injunction and MOTION for Temporary Restraining Order by Curtis Taylor. (Attachments: #1 envelope)(skc) |
| Filing 3 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 (gkp) |
| Filing 2 Letter in Support of Complaint. (gkp) |
| Filing 1 PRO SE COMPLAINT for Violation of Civil Rights Under 42 USC 1983 against All Defendants, filed by Curtis Taylor. (Attachments: #1 Trust Fund Account Statements, #2 envelope)(gkp) (Additional attachment(s) added on 1/26/2024: #3 Judicial Label) (gkp). |
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.
