Spencer Martin v. Matthew Blair, et al
| SPENCER MARTIN |
| JOSEPH DETHROW and MATTHEW BLAIR |
| 24-2408 |
| August 13, 2024 |
| U.S. Court of Appeals, Seventh Circuit |
| Prison Condition |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on October 11, 2024. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Filing 10 Pro se motion filed by Appellant Spencer Martin for appointment of counsel. [10] [7411005] [24-2408] (DAB) [Entered: 10/11/2024 04:17 PM] |
| Filing 9 Filed district court order dated 09/26/2024, the Court neglected to assess an initial partial filing fee for the appeal. Based on the trust fund information Plaintiff provided to the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals, the Court assesses Plaintiff an initial partial filing fee of $1.74. [9] [7408094] PLRA initial partial filing fee due by 10/28/2024. [24-2408] (CAG) [Entered: 09/27/2024 12:00 PM] |
Filing 8
ORDER: On September 26, 2024, the district court granted the appellant leave to proceed in forma pauperis on appeal. In order to permit the appeal to proceed, it is requested that the district court assess an initial partial filing fee for the appeal and to notify this court when the partial fee has been collected. See 28 U.S.C. 1915(b)(1). [8] [7407843] SCR [24-2408] (HTP) [Entered: 09/26/2024 12:18 PM]
|
| Filing 7 Filed District Court order GRANTING Appellant Spencer Martin leave to proceed on appeal in forma pauperis. Date IFP granted: 09/26/2024. [7] [7407817] [24-2408] (CAG) [Entered: 09/26/2024 11:42 AM] |
|
Filing 6
ORDER re: Motion to proceed and show why appellant's in forma pauperis is late do to Menard Prison. This appeal is subject to the Prison Litigation Reform Act and therefore all proceedings are suspended pending the assessment and payment of any necessary fees. See Newlin v. Helman, 123 F.3d 429, 434 (7th Cir. 1997). A review of the docket indicates that the appellant's fee status has not yet been determined. Specifically, the appellants motion for leave to proceed on appeal in forma pauperis is currently pending before the district court. Accordingly, to the extent that the appellant seeks an extension of time, IT IS ORDERED that the appellant shall file his overdue Circuit Rule 3(c) docketing statement by October 9, 2024. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that any other relief requested in the appellants motion is DENIED without court action, pursuant to the courts fee notice and order dated August 13, 2024. [6] [7407452] CDH [24-2408] (AP) [Entered: 09/25/2024 10:18 AM]
|
|
Filing 5
ORDER: TRANSFERRING the motion for leave to appeal in forma pauperis on appeal to the clerk of the District Court for ruling in the first instance. [5] [7407375] JR [24-2408] (CG) [Entered: 09/24/2024 03:45 PM]
|
| Filing 4 Pro se motion filed by Appellant Spencer Martin to show reasons why I believe I am entitled to redress [4] [7407131] [24-2408] (CAG) [Entered: 09/23/2024 04:04 PM] |
| Filing 3 Prose motion filed by Appellant Spencer Martin to proceed on appeal in forma pauperis. [3] [7407129] [24-2408] (CAG) [Entered: 09/23/2024 04:03 PM] |
| Filing 2 Pro se motion filed by Appellant Spencer Martin to proceed and show why appellant's in forma pauperis is late do to Menard Prison. [2] [7407128] [24-2408] (CAG) [Entered: 09/23/2024 04:02 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 Spencer Martin by 08/19/2024. PLRA Fee/Motion/Memorandum due on 09/12/2024. Transcript information sheet due by 08/27/2024. [1] [7399197] [24-2408] (HTP) [Entered: 08/14/2024 09:23 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.
