James Eastridge v. State of Indiana, et al
| JAMES DARREN EASTRIDGE |
| STATE OF INDIANA, WILLIAM WHELEHAN, ALEXIS WHELAN, RYAN KNIGHT and TODD KNIGHT |
| 23-1546 |
| March 22, 2023 |
| U.S. Court of Appeals, Seventh Circuit |
| Prison Condition |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on May 8, 2023. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Filing 4 ENTRY REMOVED AS ENTERED IN ERROR. Pro se motion filed by Appellant James Darren Eastridge to supplement the record on appeal with attached exhibits. [4] [7308965] [23-1546]--[Edited 05/08/2023 by CAH] (CAH) [Entered: 05/08/2023 03:08 PM] |
| Filing 3 Filed District Court order DENYING Appellant James Darren Eastridge leave to proceed on appeal in forma pauperis. Date IFP denied: 03/23/2023. [3] [7299460] PLRA Fee/Motion/Memorandum due on 04/24/2023 [23-1546] (CAG) [Entered: 03/23/2023 02:41 PM] |
| Filing 2 This is notification that no appellee(s) or counsel for the appellee(s) were served in the District Court. [2] [7299357] (Note: The Office of the IN Attorney General has been notified of the filing of the appeal.) [23-1546] (AP) [Entered: 03/23/2023 11:07 AM] |
| 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 IFP pending in the District Court. Docketing Statement due for Appellant James Darren Eastridge by 03/27/2023. Transcript information sheet due by 04/05/2023.. [1] [7299351] [23-1546] (AP) [Entered: 03/23/2023 10:48 AM] |
Access additional case information on PACER
Access the Case Summary and Docket Report to access additional information about this case on the U.S. 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.
