Landry v. Bolster et al
| James Leonard Landry |
| Mark J. Bolster, John Doe, Matthew W. Mellady and United States of America |
| 2:2019cv00560 |
| October 21, 2019 |
| US District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia |
| Mark S Davis |
| Robert J Krask |
| Prison Condition |
| 28 U.S.C. ยง 1331 |
| Plaintiff |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on December 9, 2019. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Filing 4 MOTION for Leave to Proceed in forma pauperis by James Leonard Landry. (Attachments: #1 Letter, #2 Envelope)(jmey, ) |
Filing 3
ORDER. If Plaintiff wishes his submission to be considered by the Court, he is DIRECTED to either remit the statutory filing fee of $350.00 or complete and submit an in forma pauperis application within thirty (30) days from the date of this Order. The Clerk is DIRECTED to send a copy of this Order with a copy of the Court's in forma pauperis application to Plaintiff. Signed by Chief District Judge Mark S. Davis on 11/25/2019. Copies mailed 11/25/2019.(jmey, )
|
| Filing 2 Submission by Plaintiff. (Attachments: #1 Envelope)(jmey, ) |
| Filing 1 COMPLAINT, Conditionally filed against Mark J. Bolster, John Doe, Matthew W. Mellady, United States of America (Filing fee $ 0.00.), filed by James Leonard Landry. (Attachments: #1 Proposed Summons, #2 Letter, #3 Envelope) (No service copies provided.)(jmey, ) |
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 Virginia Eastern 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.
