Mitchell v. Strata et al
| Raymon A. Mitchell |
| Frank Strata, Brandon Watwood, Robert J. Cravens and FNU Ramos |
| 1:2024cv01045 |
| February 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 March 28, 2024. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Filing 7 Amended PRO SE COMPLAINT for Violation of Civil Rights Under 42 USC 1983 against All Defendants, filed by Raymon A. Mitchell. (Attachments: #1 envelope)(gkp) |
| Filing 6 Filing fee: $ 405, receipt number 100000661 (gkp) |
Filing 5
ORDER directing Plaintiff to comply with 28 U.S.C. 1915(A)(1)-(2) or pay the entire $405 civil filing fee. Signed by Chief Magistrate Judge Tu M. Pham on March 15, 2024. (cmd)
|
| Filing 4 MOTION to Appoint Counsel by Raymon A. Mitchell. (Attachments: #1 Cover letter, #2 envelope)(gkp) |
| 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 (skc) |
| Filing 2 MOTION to Appoint Counsel filed by Raymon A. Mitchell. (Attachments: #1 envelope)(skc) |
| Filing 1 PRO SE COMPLAINT 40 USC 1983 filed by Raymon A. Mitchell. (Attachments: #1 cover letter, #2 envelope, #3 Judge Card)(skc) |
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.
