Marshall v. Oldham
Petitioner: Ebony D. Marshall
Respondent: Bill Oldham
Case Number: 2:2016cv02841
Filed: October 24, 2016
Court: US District Court for the Western District of Tennessee
Office: Memphis Office
County: Shelby
Presiding Judge: Charmiane G. Claxton
Presiding Judge: James D. Todd
Nature of Suit: Civil Rights
Cause of Action: 28 U.S.C. ยง 1983
Jury Demanded By: None

Available Case Documents

The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:

Date Filed Document Text
October 10, 2017 Opinion or Order Filing 12 JUDGMENT. Signed by Chief Judge S. Thomas Anderson on 10/10/2017. (mbb)
October 26, 2016 Opinion or Order Filing 3 ORDER DIRECTING PLAINTIFF TO COMPLY WITH 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(1)-(2) OR PAY THE $400 CIVIL FILING FEE. Signed by Judge James D. Todd on 10/26/16. (Todd, James)
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 this case: Marshall v. Oldham
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Petitioner: Ebony D. Marshall
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 ]
Respondent: Bill Oldham
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.


Why Is My Information Online?