Hughes v. Abilene Police Department
| Terrell Rayshawn Hughes |
| Abilene Police Department |
| 3:2018cv02921 |
| November 1, 2018 |
| US District Court for the Northern District of Texas |
| Barbara MG Lynn |
| Renee Harris Toliver |
| Civil Rights: Other Civil Rights |
| 42 U.S.C. ยง 1983 |
| Plaintiff |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on November 5, 2018. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing 6
ELECTRONIC Order transferring case to the Abilene Division of the United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas. Under the authority of Miscellaneous Order No. 6, this action is transferred to the Abilene Division, where venue is proper. See 28 U.S.C. 1404(a). The events at issue occurred in Taylor County, Texas, which lies within the boundaries of the Abilene Division. Plaintiff, a resident of Dallas, Texas, filed this pro se action against Defendant Abilene Police Department complaining of constitutional violations stemming from alleged racial profiling and his subsequent arrest in Abilene, Texas. (Ordered by Magistrate Judge Renee Harris Toliver on 11/5/2018) (chmb)
|
| Case copied to 1:18cv0180-C. Transfer to Abilene Division complete; clerk to set Related Case hyperlink, clear unnecessary flags, etc. (ldm) |
| Filing 5 MOTION for Leave to Proceed in forma pauperis filed by Terrell Rayshawn Hughes. (mcrd/ala) |
| Filing 4 CERTIFICATE OF INTERESTED PERSONS/DISCLOSURE STATEMENT by Terrell Rayshawn Hughes. (mcrd/ala) |
| Filing 3 COMPLAINT against Abilene Police Department filed by Terrell Rayshawn Hughes. Unless exempted, attorneys who are not admitted to practice in the Northern District of Texas must seek admission promptly. Forms, instructions, and exemption information may be found at www.txnd.uscourts.gov, or by clicking here: # Attorney Information - Bar Membership. If admission requirements are not satisfied within 21 days, the clerk will notify the presiding judge. (mcrd/ala) |
| Filing 2 Notice and Instruction to Pro Se Party. (mcrd/ala) |
| Filing 1 New Case Notes: A filing fee has not been paid. CASREF case referral set and case referred to Magistrate Judge Toliver (see Special Order 3). Case received over counter/electronically. No prior sanctions found. (For court use only - links to the #national and #circuit indexes.) Pursuant to Misc. Order 6, Plaintiff is provided the Notice of Right to Consent to Proceed Before A U.S. Magistrate Judge (Judge Toliver). Clerk to provide copy to plaintiff if not received electronically. (mcrd) |
| ***Clerk's Notice of delivery: (see NEF for details) Docket No:1,2. Thu Nov 1 15:49:38 CDT 2018 (crt) |
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 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
| Search for this case: Hughes v. Abilene Police Department | |
|---|---|
| Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
| Search Web | [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ] |
| Defendant: Abilene Police Department | |
| 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 ] |
| Plaintiff: Terrell Rayshawn Hughes | |
| 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.
