Benjamin Ziogas v. Fourth District Appellate Court Clerk, et al
| BENJAMIN LEE ZIOGAS |
| FOURTH DISTRICT APPELLATE COURT CLERK, CRAIG DEARMOND, THOMAS HARRIS, ROBERT STEIGMANN and KARL MUNDT |
| 24-1832 |
| May 13, 2024 |
| U.S. Court of Appeals, Seventh Circuit |
| Prison Condition |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on May 15, 2024. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Filing 4 Filed District Court order DENYING Appellant Benjamin Lee Ziogas leave to proceed on appeal in forma pauperis. Date IFP denied: 05/15/2024. [4] [7382462] PLRA Fee/Motion/Memorandum due on 06/14/2024 [24-1832] (CAH) [Entered: 05/15/2024 11:52 AM] |
| Filing 3 This is notification that no appellee(s) or counsel for the appellee(s) were served in the District Court. [3] [7382230] [24-1832] (ER) [Entered: 05/14/2024 12:26 PM] |
| Filing 2 THIS CAUSE CONSISTS OF MORE THAN 5 PARTIES FOR EITHER SIDE. The following are those parties to this cause as reflected on the District Court docket, yet are not reflected on the Appellate docket/caption for administrative purposes: APPELLEES Derek Dion, Ryan Cadigan and Brian Henson. [2] [7382229] [24-1832] (ER) [Entered: 05/14/2024 12:26 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 IFP pending in the District Court. Docketing statement filed. Transcript information sheet due by 05/28/2024. [1] [7382227] [24-1832] (ER) [Entered: 05/14/2024 12:20 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.
