Murray v. Texas Dept of Pardons and Paroles
| Lloyd Murray |
| Texas Dept of Pardons and Paroles |
| 3:2019cv01880 |
| August 7, 2019 |
| US District Court for the Northern District of Texas |
| David C Godbey |
| Rebecca Rutherford |
| Prisoner Pet/Other: Civil Rights |
| 42 U.S.C. ยง 1983 |
| None |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on November 1, 2019. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing 8
ORDER granting #5 Motion for Leave to Proceed In Forma Pauperis. The Clerk of the Court SHALL NOT ISSUE SUMMONS or take any further action pending judicial screening. (Ordered by Magistrate Judge Rebecca Rutherford on 8/16/2019) (axm)
|
|
Filing 7
ORDER re: #6 Motion for Leave to Amend Complaint. To the extent Plaintiff asks the Court to consider the claim in his amended complaint, the motion is GRANTED. (Ordered by Magistrate Judge Rebecca Rutherford on 8/16/2019) (axm)
|
| ***Clerk's Notice of delivery: (see NEF for details) Docket No:7,8. Fri Aug 16 14:21:39 CDT 2019 (crt) |
| Filing 6 MOTION to Amend, MOTION for Summary Judgment filed by Lloyd Murray. (aaa) |
| ***Clerk's Notice of delivery: (see NEF for details) Docket No:1, 2. Thu Aug 8 10:45:44 CDT 2019 (crt) |
| Filing 5 MOTION for Leave to Proceed in forma pauperis filed by Lloyd Murray (rekc) |
| Filing 4 CERTIFICATE OF INTERESTED PERSONS/DISCLOSURE STATEMENT by Lloyd Murray. (rekc) |
| Filing 3 COMPLAINT against Texas Dept of Pardons and Paroles filed by Lloyd Murray. 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. (rekc) |
| Filing 2 Notice and Instruction to Pro Se Party (rekc) |
| Filing 1 New Case Notes: A filing fee has not been paid. CASREF case referral set and case referred to Magistrate Judge Rutherford (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 Rutherford). Clerk to provide copy to plaintiff if not received electronically. (rekc) |
| MOTION for Temporary Restraining Order filed by Lloyd Murray. (Please see document #3 for image.) (rekc) |
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: Murray v. Texas Dept of Pardons and Paroles | |
|---|---|
| Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
| Search Web | [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ] |
| Defendant: Texas Dept of Pardons and Paroles | |
| 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: Lloyd Murray | |
| 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.
