Davis v. Williams et al
| Laterious K. Davis |
| N. Williams, S. Freeman and A. Coxs |
| 2:2022cv02821 |
| November 28, 2022 |
| US District Court for the Western District of Tennessee |
| Samuel H Mays |
| Tu M Pham |
| Prisoner Petitions (Prison Condition) |
| 42 U.S.C. ยง 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights |
| None |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on January 6, 2023. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing 6
ORDER granting #2 Motion for Leave to Proceed in forma pauperis and assessing the $350.00 filing fee in accordance with PLRA, signed by Judge Samuel H. Mays, Jr. on 01/06/2023. (Mays, Samuel)
|
| Filing 5 NOTICE of Inmate Balance History Report by Laterious K. Davis (Attachments: #1 envelope)(agj) |
|
Filing 4
ORDER directing Plaintiff to comply with 28 U.S.C. 1915(a)(2) or pay the $402 civil filing fee, signed by Judge Samuel H. Mays, Jr. on 12/01/2022. (Mays, Samuel)
|
| 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 (csf) |
| Filing 2 Pro Se MOTION for Leave to Proceed in forma pauperis by Laterious K. Davis. (Attachments: #1 Order to Proceed IFP)(csf) |
| Filing 1 PRO SE COMPLAINT for Violation of Civil Rights against All Defendants, filed by Laterious K. Davis. (Attachments: #1 Statement, #2 Civil Cover Sheet, #3 Envelope, #4 Judicial Cards)(csf) |
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.
