Al-Azim et al v. Everett et al
| Raheem S. Al-Azim, Charles X and Victor X |
| J. Everett, R. W. Younce, V. M. Washington, Benjamin Wright, Tracey Ray, Timothy Puryear, Andrew E. Wiggings, Raymond Williams, Rodriguez, Lewis, A. David Robinson, Wendy Hobbs, Harold Clarke, Linda Shear, Louis B. Cei and Ralph Abernathy |
| 3:2014cv00339 |
| May 12, 2014 |
| US District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia |
| Richmond Office |
| Sussex |
| M. Hannah Lauck |
| James R. Spencer |
| Prison Condition |
| 42 U.S.C. ยง 1983 |
| None |
Follow case documents by RSS
Available Case Documents
The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing
85
In accordance with the accompanying Memorandum Opinion, it is ORDERED that: 1. Report and Recommendation 83 is ACCEPTED and ADOPTED; 2. Claims 1(a) and 1(b) are DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE; and, 3. The action is DISMISSED.Should Plaintiff's desi re to appeal, a written notice of appeal must be filed with the Clerk of the Court within thirty (30) days of the date of entry hereof. Signed by District Judge James R. Spencer on 03/22/2017. See Order for further details. It is so ORDERED. Copy of Order mailed with Memorandum Opinion to Plaintiff as directed. (ccol, )
|
|
Filing
64
MEMORANDUM OPINION. Signed by District Judge James R. Spencer on 8/23/2016. (sbea, )
|
|
Filing
42
MEMORANDUM OPINION. Signed by District Judge James R. Spencer on 8/3/2015. (sbea, )
|
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.
