Pape v. Cook et al
| Johnathan Pape |
| Robert Martin, Rollin Cook, Shea and Ocasio |
| 3:2020cv01324 |
| September 8, 2020 |
| US District Court for the District of Connecticut |
| Victor A Bolden |
| Prisoner: Civil Rights |
| 42 U.S.C. ยง 1983 |
| Plaintiff |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on May 28, 2021. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Filing fee received from Johnathan Pape: $ 400.00, receipt number CTXB00011615. (Fanelle, N.) |
| Filing 6 MOTION to Appoint Counsel by Johnathan Pape. (Payton, R.) |
| Filing 5 Notice to petitioner re: Insufficiency. You must submit the filing fee of $400.00 or the attached Prisoner's IFP application which is being sent to you via U.S. mail. If insufficiency not corrected Dismissal due by 9/30/2020 Signed by Magistrate Judge William I Garfinkel on 9/9/20.(Payton, R.) |
Filing 4
ELECTRONIC FILING ORDER FOR COUNSEL - PLEASE ENSURE COMPLIANCE WITH COURTESY COPY REQUIREMENTS IN THIS ORDER Signed by Judge Victor A. Bolden on 9/8/2020. (Oliver, T.)
|
|
Filing 3
Prisoner E-Filing Standing Order on Prisoner Electronic Filing Program Signed by Judge Janet C. Hall on 9/8/2020. (Oliver, T.)
|
|
Filing 2
STANDING PROTECTIVE ORDER Signed by Judge Victor A. Bolden on 9/8/2020. (Oliver, T.)
|
| Filing 1 PRISCS - COMPLAINT against Rollin Cook, Robert Martin, Ocasio, Shea, filed by Johnathan Pape. (Oliver, T.) |
Access additional case information on PACER
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.
