Cantu v. Gomez et al
| Kane Cantu |
| Victoria M Gomez, Kody L Thorton, Hunter and Britney R. Reagans |
| 4:2026cv06741 |
| August 14, 2026 |
| U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Texas |
| Ewing Werlein |
| Prisoner: Civil Rights |
| 42 U.S.C. ยง 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights |
| None |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on August 17, 2026. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Filing 4 NOTICE to Pro Se Litigant of Case Opening, with Notice Regarding Consent to Jurisdiction of a Magistrate Judge. Party notified, filed. (bow4) |
| Referral Judge Selected: Magistrate Judge Dena Hanovice Palermo randomly selected to receive referrals. The selected Magistrate Judge is not assigned to this case until a District Judge refers the case or a motion or the parties consent to jurisdiction of the Magistrate Judge. Once a referral has been made, the name of the referral judge will appear at the top of the docket sheet. (bow4) |
| Filing 3 Prisoner Trust Fund Account Statement by Kane Cantu, filed. (bow4) |
| Filing 2 Plaintiff's MOTION/APPLICATION to Proceed In Forma Pauperis by Kane Cantu, filed. Motion Docket Date 9/4/2026. (bow4) (Main Document 2 replaced on 8/17/2026) (bow4). |
| Filing 1 Prisoner Civil Rights COMPLAINT against Victoria M Gomez, Hunter, Britney R. Reagans, Kody L Thorton (Filing fee $ 405) filed by Kane Cantu. (bow4) |
Access additional case information on PACER
Use the links below to access additional information about this case on the U.S. 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.
