Webb v. Broyles
| 7:2014cv00106 |
| March 13, 2014 |
| US District Court for the Western District of Virginia |
| Roanoke Office |
| Robert S. Ballou |
| James P. Jones |
| Prisoner: Civil Rights |
| 42 U.S.C. ยง 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights |
| 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
84
OPINION and ORDER adopting Report and Recommendations re 75 Report and Recommendations; Objections by Plaintiff are overruled; and a separate Judgment will be entered in favor of Defendant Broyles. Signed by Judge James P. Jones on 1/19/2016. (tvt)
|
|
Filing
48
OPINION. Signed by Judge James P. Jones on 3/30/2015. (tvt)
|
|
Filing
31
ORDER granting in part and denying in part 19 Motion to Dismiss; granting 21 Motion for Protective Order; denying 23 Motion for Discovery; granting 25 Motion for Protective Order; granting 27 Prisoner Miscellaneous Motion; granting 28 Motion to Amend/Correct; and the plaintiff is DIRECTED to submit an Amended Complaint within 21 days from entry of this order. Signed by Judge James P. Jones on 7/29/2014. (tvt)
|
|
Filing
15
OPINION. Signed by Judge James P. Jones on 4/9/2014. (tvt)
|
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 Western 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
| Search for this case: Webb v. Broyles | |
|---|---|
| Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
| Search Web | [ Unicourt | 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.
