Walker v. Chapdelaine et al
| Darnell Walker |
| Chapdelaine, John Aldi and Rivera |
| 3:2016cv01404 |
| August 17, 2016 |
| US District Court for the District of Connecticut |
| New Haven Office |
| Hartford |
| Stefan R. Underhill |
| Civil Rights |
| 42 U.S.C. ยง 1983 |
| Plaintiff |
Follow case documents by RSS
Available Case Documents
The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing
19
ORDER denying 14 MOTION to Reopen Case, 17 MOTION to Compel, and 18 MOTION for Default; denying as moot 15 MOTION for Leave to Proceed In Forma Pauperis. Signed by Judge Stefan R. Underhill on 08/24/2017. (Jamieson, K)
|
|
Filing
12
ORDER denying 8 MOTION for Reconsideration, 9 MOTION for Judgment on the Pleadings, and 10 MOTION for Leave to Proceed In Forma Pauperis; denying as moot 11 MOTION to Advance. Signed by Judge Stefan R. Underhill on 01/09/2017. (Jamieson, K)
|
|
Filing
7
ORDER DENYING 2 MOTION for Leave to Proceed In Forma Pauperis; VACATING 6 ORDER Granting Application to Proceed In Forma Pauperis. All further proceedings in the matter shall be held in abeyance for 30 days pending the plaintiff's delivery o f the filing fee in the amount of $400.00 (cash or bank check made payable to the Clerk of Court) to the Clerk's Office, 915 Lafayette Blvd., Bridgeport, CT 06604. Failure to tender the filing fee within 30 days of this order will result in the dismissal of the action. Signed by Judge Stefan R. Underhill on 09/12/2016. (Jamieson, K)
|
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 Connecticut 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.
