White v. State of Texas et al
| Daniel White |
| State of Texas, Judge Salvant and Judge Struns |
| 4:2021cv00877 |
| July 20, 2021 |
| US District Court for the Northern District of Texas |
| Reed C O'Connor |
| Hal R Ray |
| Civil Rights: Other Civil Rights |
| 42 U.S.C. ยง 1983 |
| None |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on January 7, 2022. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing 11
Supplemental Document by Daniel White as to #1 Complaint. (mmw)
|
|
Filing 10
Supplemental Document by Daniel White as to #1 Complaint (mmw)
|
|
Filing 9
Supplemental Document by Daniel White as to #1 Complaint. (tln)
|
|
Filing 8
Supplemental Document by Daniel White as to #1 Complaint. (tln)
|
|
Filing 7
Supplemental Document by Daniel White as to #1 Complaint. (bdb)
|
|
Filing 6
ORDER... On July 20, 2021, the pro se plaintiff filed his complaint against the defendants. ECF No. 1. Because he paid the filing fee, the plaintiff is now responsible for serving the defendants with a summons and a copy of the complaint in this case as provided by Rule 4(c) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. If the defendants are not served within 90 days after the filing of the complaint, the action is subject to dismissal without prejudice. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 4(m). In addition, Fed. R. Civ. P. 4(l) requires the plaintiff to file proof of service with the Court unless service is waived. This proof must consist of the servers affidavit if service was not effected by the United States Marshal or a deputy marshal. Id. If the plaintiffs do not file a valid return of service or otherwise show that the defendants were properly served, this action may be dismissed as to any defendant who was not properly served. (Ordered by Magistrate Judge Hal R. Ray, Jr on 8/5/2021) (wxc)
|
|
***Clerk's Notice of delivery: (see NEF for details) Docket No:6. Summons form and a copy of Fed. R. Civ. P. 4. Thu Aug 5 16:41:58 CDT 2021 (crt)
|
|
Filing 5
Document titled "Affidavit Cover Additional Info" filed by Daniel White (wxc)
|
|
Filing 4
Notice and Instruction to Pro Se Party (wxc)
|
|
Filing 3
New Case Notes: A filing fee has been paid. CASREF case referral set (see Special Order 3). Magistrate Judge Ray preliminarily assigned. No prior sanctions found. (For court use only - links to the #national and #circuit indexes.) File to: No court file needed. Pursuant to Misc. Order 6, Plaintiff is provided the Notice of Right to Consent to Proceed Before A U.S. Magistrate Judge. Clerk to provide copy to plaintiff if not received electronically. Attorneys are further reminded that, if necessary, they must comply with Local Rule 83.10(a) within 14 days or risk the possible dismissal of this case without prejudice or without further notice. (wxc)
|
|
Filing 2
CERTIFICATE OF INTERESTED PERSONS/DISCLOSURE STATEMENT by Daniel White. (wxc)
|
|
Filing 1
COMPLAINT against Judge Salvant, Judge Struns, State of Texas filed by Daniel White. (Filing fee $402.00; Receipt number FW036611) 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. (wxc)
|
|
***Clerk's Notice of delivery: (see NEF for details) Docket No:3,4. Tue Jul 20 16:49:57 CDT 2021 (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
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.
