Brooks II v. Harris County Jail et al
| Gregory W. Brooks II and Gregory W Brooks, II |
| District Attorney Kim Ogg, District Court and Harris County Jail |
| 4:2020cv02683 |
| July 30, 2020 |
| US District Court for the Southern District of Texas |
| Houston Office |
| Kenneth M Hoyt |
| Prisoner: Civil Rights |
| 42 U.S.C. ยง 1983 |
| None |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on August 5, 2020. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing 4
ORDER OF DISMISSAL - Brooks has not paid the filing fee. Brooks accumulated at least 11 such dismissals before filing the pending complaint and is no longer allowed to proceed in forma pauperis pursuant to the provisions of section 1915(g). ORDERS that the Prisoner Civil Rights Complaint (Doc. # 1), filed by Harris County inmate Gregory W. Brooks II is DISMISSED. 28 U.S.C. 1915(g); 28 U.S.C. 1915(e)....*** Case terminated on 8/5/20...*** Email sent to Manager of Three Strikes List. (Signed by Judge Kenneth M Hoyt) Parties notified.(sanderson, 4)
|
| Filing 3 NOTICE to Pro Se Litigant of Case Opening. Party notified, filed. (ShadiaNash, 4) |
| Filing 2 MOTION/APPLICATION to Proceed In Forma Pauperis by Gregory W. Brooks II, filed. Motion Docket Date 8/20/2020. (ShadiaNash, 4) |
| Filing 1 Prisoner Civil Rights COMPLAINT against All Defendants (Filing fee $ 400) filed by Gregory W. Brooks II.(ShadiaNash, 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 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.
