1:23-cv-00099 Wiggins v. Lumpkin et al
Objection to Report and Recommendations ( 20
The plaintiff, Wiggins, objected to the report and recommendations in the case Wiggins v. Lumpkin et al, which was filed in the US District Court for the Southern District of New York (SDNY) on January 23, 2023. The objection was made in response to a report and recommendations filed by a magistrate judge. This objection is significant because it indicates that the plaintiff is contesting the magistrate judge's findings and recommendations.
No timeline activity recorded yet. This page will grow as rulings and filings land.
Court
E.D. Tex.
Eastern District of Texas · 5th Circuit · TX
Docket
Not captured
Civil
Stage
Active litigation
Active
Filed
Date unavailable
Not in the available feed
Latest Filing
1:23-cv-00099 Wiggins v. Lumpkin et al
Other · May 01, 2026
Coverage
1 article
1 source tracked
Participants
Parties not parsed yet
2 linked entities
Judge
Not assigned in feed
This case is tied to Eastern District of Texas, a federal district court in TX.
The newest docket activity we have is a other dated May 01, 2026.
Party extraction has not produced a reliable plaintiff/defendant graph yet, so no speculative names are shown.
Press monitoring has found 1 related article from 1 distinct source.
Eastern District of Texas (E.D. Tex.) is a federal district court in the 5th Circuit, TX.
The plaintiff, Wiggins, objected to the report and recommendations in the case Wiggins v. Lumpkin et al, which was filed in the US District Court for the Southern District of New York (SDNY) on January 23, 2023. The objection was made in response to a report and recommendations filed by a magistrate judge. This objection is significant because it indicates that the plaintiff is contesting the magistrate judge's findings and recommendations.
Objection to Report and Recommendations ( 20
Sources tracked
1 outlet · 1 article
Timeline events
1 record on file
Last updated
1 day, 1 hour ago
Juryvine aggregates docket entries from PACER/CourtListener, press coverage, and GDELT signals. Ingestion timestamps do not appear in the What Changed feed — that reflects real court activity only.