Stewart v. Korsen et al
Jenghiz K Stewart |
Unknown Lopez, Unknown Korsen and Unknown Jackson |
2:2010cv01144 |
May 27, 2010 |
US District Court for the District of Arizona |
Phoenix Division Office |
Pinal |
Mary H Murguia |
Edward C Voss |
Prison Condition |
42 U.S.C. ยง 1983 |
None |
Available Case Documents
The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:
Document Text |
---|
Filing 41 ORDER denying as moot 25 Plaintiff's Motion for Preliminary Injunction; Plaintiff's Motion for TRO and denying as moot 29 Plaintiff's Motion to Compel of Exhibits. Signed by Judge Mary H Murguia on 12/28/10.(LSP) |
Filing 8 ORDER granting 7 Plaintiff's Motion/Application to Proceed In Forma Pauperis. Plaintiff must pay the $350.00 filing fee. Counts Two, Three, and Four, and Defendants Unknown Nietto, Charles Ryan, Unknown Credio and Unknown Muller are dismi ssed without prejudice. Defendants Korsen, Jackson, and Lopez must answer Count One. The Clerk must send Plaintiff a service packet including 1 Complaint, this Order, and both summons and request for waiver forms for Defendants Korsen, Jackson, and Lopez. Plaintiff must complete and return the service packet to the Clerk of Court within 21 days of the date of filing of this Order. This matter is referred to Magistrate Judge Edward C. Voss pursuant to Rules 72.1 and 72.2 of the Local Rules of Civil Procedure for all pretrial proceedings. Signed by Judge Mary H Murguia on 7/1/10. (LSP) |
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 Arizona 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.