Williams v. Quiros et al
| Christopher Williams |
| Angel Quiros, Sharonda Carlos, William Mulligan, Nick Rodriguez, Jesus Guadarrama, Pelczar, Bell and Luis Perez |
| 3:2022cv01367 |
| October 31, 2022 |
| US District Court for the District of Connecticut |
| Victor A Bolden |
| Thomas O Farrish |
| Prisoner Petitions - Prison Conditions |
| 42 U.S.C. ยง 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights |
| Plaintiff |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on July 19, 2023. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Filing fee received from Christopher Williams: $ 402.00, receipt number BPT13373 (Imbriani, Susan) |
Filing 11
ORDER: Christopher Williams ("Plaintiff"), who is incarcerated at Osborn Correctional Institution, has sued employees of the State of Connecticut Department of Correction under 42 U.S.C. 1983 and seeks leave to proceed without paying the filing fee under 28 U.S.C. 1915. The Court considers whether information provided by Mr. Williams demonstrates that the burden of paying the fees for filing and service would hamper his ability to obtain the necessities of life or force him to abandon a potentially meritorious claim. Adkins v. E.I. Dupont de Nemours & Co., 335 U.S. 331, 339-40 (1948). Mr. Williams receives monthly wages of approximately $109 for performing his prison job; his inmate account balance was $3,126.35 as of October 28, 2022; and he has no dependents or obligations for room and board. See ECF Nos. 2 & 3. Accordingly, Mr. Williams has failed to demonstrate that he would have to forgo life's necessities if he paid the $402.00 filing fee and the Court DENIES his motion to proceed in forma pauperis (ECF No. 2). All further proceedings in the matter shall be held in abeyance for twenty (20) days pending Mr. Williams's delivery of the filing fee in the amount of $402.00 (money order, or bank or cashiers check made payable to the Clerk, U.S. District Court) to the Clerks Office, 915 Lafayette Boulevard, Bridgeport, CT 06604. Failure to tender the filing fee by December 2, 2022 will result in the dismissal of this action. Signed by Judge Victor A. Bolden on 11/03/2022. (Jean-Jacques, Walter)
|
| Filing 10 MOTION to Appoint Counsel by Christopher Williams. (Imbriani, Susan) |
| Filing 9 MOTION for Temporary Restraining Order, MOTION for Preliminary Injunction (Responses due by 11/23/2022, ) by Christopher Williams. (Attachments: #1 Memorandum in Support, #2 Declaration in Support)(Imbriani, Susan) |
| Filing 8 PROPOSED ORDER to Show Cause and Temporary Restraining Order by Christopher Williams. (Imbriani, Susan) |
|
Filing 7
Prisoner E-filing Standing Order on Prisoner Electronic Filing Program Signed by Judge Janet C. Hall on 10/31/2022.(Imbriani, Susan)
|
|
Filing 6
ELECTRONIC FILING ORDER FOR COUNSEL - PLEASE ENSURE COMPLIANCE WITH COURTESY COPY REQUIREMENTS IN THIS ORDER Signed by Judge Victor A. Bolden on 10/31/2022.(Imbriani, Susan)
|
|
Filing 5
STANDING PROTECTIVE ORDER Signed by Judge Victor A. Bolden on 10/31/2022.(Imbriani, Susan)
|
| Filing 4 Prisoner Authorization Form by Christopher Williams. (Oliver, T.) |
| Filing 3 Prisoner Trust Fund Account Statement by Christopher Williams. (Oliver, T.) |
| Filing 2 MOTION for Leave to Proceed in forma pauperis by Christopher Williams. (Oliver, T.) |
| Filing 1 COMPLAINT against Bell, Sharonda Carlos, Jesus Guadarrama, William Mulligan, Pelczar, Luis Perez, Angel Quiros, Nick Rodriguez, filed by Christopher Williams. (Oliver, T.) |
| Judge Victor A. Bolden and Judge Thomas O. Farrish added. (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.
