Pipkin v. Coffee et al
| Byron Pipkin |
| Lee V. Coffee, Leslie Byrd, State of Tennessee, Shelby County Criminal Justice Center and Shelby County, Tennessee |
| 2:2023cv02483 |
| August 7, 2023 |
| 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 August 31, 2023. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing 5
ORDER modifying the docket, dismissing the complaint with prejduice in part and without prejudice in part, and granting leave to amend the claims dismissed without prejudice, signed by Judge Samuel H. Mays, Jr. on 08/31/2023. (Mays, Samuel)
|
|
Filing 4
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 8/8/2023. (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 Byron Pipkin. (Attachments: #1 Inmate Balance History Report)(csf) |
| Filing 1 PRO SE COMPLAINT for Violation of Civil Rights Under 42 U.S.C. 1983 against All Defendants, filed by Byron Pipkin. (Attachments: #1 Case assignment label, #2 Envelope)(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.
