Hill v. Fagan, et al
| O C Hill, Jr |
| Lloyd Fagan, Russell Thomason and Gary Don Peak |
| 1:2016cv00185 |
| October 17, 2016 |
| US District Court for the Northern District of Texas |
| Abilene Office |
| Coryell |
| E. Scott Frost |
| Civil Rights |
| 42 U.S.C. ยง 1983 |
| Plaintiff |
Follow case documents by RSS
Available Case Documents
The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing
12
Order: After review, the Report and Recommendation for clear error and, finding none, accepts and adopts the findings, conclusions, and recommendation 11 of the Magistrate Judge. It is ORDERED that Plaintiff's complaint and all claims allege d therein are DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE as frivolous and for failure to state a claim. Judgment shall be entered accordingly. This dismissal shall count as a qualifying dismissal under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g). Dismissal of this action does not rel ease Plaintiff or the institution where he is incarcerated from the obligation to pay any filing fee previously imposed. Plaintiff is advised that if he appeals this Order, he will be required to pay the appeal fee of $505.00 pursuant to the PL RA, and he must submit an application to proceed in forma pauperis and a 6-month Certificate of Inmate Trust Account as the same time he files his notice of appeal. Any pending motions are DENIED. (Ordered by Senior Judge Sam R Cummings on 7/3/2018) (jak)
|
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 Texas Northern 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.
