Handy v. Davis
Petitioner: Christopher Handy
Respondent: Lorie Davis
Case Number: 4:2017cv03213
Filed: October 19, 2017
Court: US District Court for the Southern District of Texas
Office: Houston Office
County: Harris
Presiding Judge: Ewing Werlein
Nature of Suit: Mandamus and Other
Cause of Action: 28 U.S.C. ยง 1361
Jury Demanded By: None

Available Case Documents

The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:

Date Filed Document Text
November 30, 2017 Opinion or Order Filing 4 ORDER OF DISMISSAL. ORDERED that Petitioner's petition for mandamus is DISMISSED without prejudice for lack of jurisdiction. It is further ORDERED that Petitioner's Motion to Proceed In Forma Pauperis is DENIED AS MOOT. Case terminated on 11/30/2017 Email sent to Manager of Three Strikes List. (Signed by Judge Ewing Werlein, Jr) Parties notified.(olindor, 4)
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 Southern District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: Handy v. Davis
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Petitioner: Christopher Handy
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 ]
Respondent: Lorie Davis
Represented By: Edward Larry Marshall
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.


Why Is My Information Online?