Kennado Taylor v. Nurse Anita, et al
| NURSE ANITA, OFFICER SMITH, OFFICER PRATT, JOHN DOE, Sergeant, OFFICER STOBAUGH and OFFICER HART |
| KENNADO K. TAYLOR |
| 20-2510 |
| August 12, 2020 |
| U.S. Court of Appeals, Seventh Circuit |
| Other |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on October 9, 2020. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing 7
ORDER: re: 1. Affidavit accompanying motion for permission to appeal in forma pauperis. 2. Affidavit accompanying motion for permission to appeal in forma pauperis. 3. Declaration of Kennado K. Taylor that I file my grounds for appeal in good faith. 4. Affidavit accompanying motion for permission to appeal in forma pauperis. 5. Memorandum of law in support of plaintiff motion to proceed in forma pauperis on appeal. 6. Affidavit accompanying motion for permission to appeal in forma pauperis. 7. Memorandum of law in support of plaintiff motion to proceed in forma pauperis on appeal. 8. Memorandum of law in support of plaintiff motion to proceed in forma pauperis on appeal. 9. Affidavit accompanying motion for permission to appeal in forma pauperis. 10. Affidavit accompanying motion for permission to appeal in forma pauperis. 11. Memorandum of law in support of plaintiff motion to proceed in forma pauperis on appeal. 12. Affidavit accompanying motion for permission to appeal in forma pauperis. 13. Affidavit accompanying motion for permission to appeal in forma pauperis. 14. Memorandum of law in support of plaintiff motion to proceed in forma pauperis on appeal. The motions for leave to proceed on appeal in forma pauperis are DENIED. See Lee v. Clinton, 209 F.3d 1025 (7th Cir. 2000). Appellant Kennado Taylor has not raised a good faith issue that the district court erred in dismissing these cases due to Taylors three strikes. Taylor shall pay the required docketing fees within 14 days, or these appeals will be dismissed for failure to prosecute pursuant to Circuit Rule 3(b). See Newlin v. Helman, 123 F.3d 429, 434 (7th Cir. 1997).(See order for details.) Sent Certified Mail. Receipt Number: 7019 0700 0000 6008 0370. JLW. [7] [7113796] [20-2221, 20-2495, 20-2510, 20-2591] (CG) [Entered: 10/09/2020 02:54 PM]
|
| Filing 6 Prose motion filed by Appellant Kennado K. Taylor to proceed on appeal in forma pauperis. [6] [7110916] [20-2510] (CAH) [Entered: 09/28/2020 12:38 PM] |
| Filing 3 Filed District Court order DENYING Appellant Kennado K. Taylor leave to proceed on appeal in forma pauperis. Date IFP denied: 08/31/2020. [3] [7104826] PLRA Fee/Motion/Memorandum due on 10/01/2020 [20-2510] (CAH) [Entered: 09/01/2020 11:26 AM] |
| Filing 5 Filed Appellant Kennado K. Taylor Memorandum In Support of PLRA Motion for Leave to Proceed on Appeal In Forma Pauperis. [5] [7105255] [20-2510] (PS) [Entered: 09/02/2020 03:02 PM] |
| Filing 4 Pro se motion filed by Appellant Kennado K. Taylor to proceed on appeal in forma pauperis. [4] [7105253] [20-2510] (PS) [Entered: 09/02/2020 03:01 PM] |
| Filing 2 This is notification that no appellee(s) or counsel for the appellee(s) were served in the District Court. [2] [7100516] [20-2510] (ER) [Entered: 08/12/2020 02:47 PM] |
| Filing 1 State prisoner's civil rights case docketed. IT IS ORDERED that this appeal is subject to the Prison Litigation Reform Act. Proceedings are SUSPENDED pending notification by the district court that any necessary fee has been assessed, and if assessed, paid. PLRA Fee due. Docketing Statement due for Appellant Kennado K. Taylor by 08/18/2020. PLRA Fee/Motion/Memorandum due on 09/11/2020. Transcript information sheet due by 08/26/2020. [1] [7100511] [20-2510] (ER) [Entered: 08/12/2020 02:40 PM] |
Access additional case information on PACER
Access the Case Summary and Docket Report to access additional information about this case on the US Court's PACER system. A subscription to PACER is required.
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.
