Bolden v. Wallace
Plaintiff: Jonathan L. Bolden
Defendant: FNU Wallace
Case Number: 5:2016cv00086
Filed: January 20, 2016
Court: US District Court for the Western District of Texas
Office: San Antonio Office
Presiding Judge: David A. Ezra
Nature of Suit: Prisoner: Civil Rights
Cause of Action: 42 U.S.C. ยง 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
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
February 1, 2016 Opinion or Order Filing 3 ORDER DISMISSING CASE AS FRIVOLOUS, Plaintiff's IFP Application is DENIED, and plaintiff's Complaint is DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE, and for failure to state a non-frivolous claim and because he seeks relief against an immune defendant. All other pending motions are DENIED AS MOOT. Signed by Judge David A. Ezra. (wg)
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 Western District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: Bolden v. Wallace
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Plaintiff: Jonathan L. Bolden
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 ]
Defendant: FNU Wallace
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?