Daniels v. Fener et al
| LaDean Daniels |
| Fener, Carlie, J. Brennan, K. Phillips, Martin, Cristien, Jane Doe, Yvonne, Jullian and Ingrid Feder |
| 3:2023cv00441 |
| April 6, 2023 |
| US District Court for the District of Connecticut |
| Thomas O Farrish |
| Sarala V Nagala |
| Prisoner Petitions - Prison Conditions |
| 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights |
| Plaintiff |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on October 11, 2023. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing 19
ORDER. The Court is in receipt of ECF No. #18 , in which Plaintiff requests to correct the spelling of Defendant Fener's name. Plaintiff's request is granted, and the Clerk is directed to change the name of Defendant "Fener" to "Ingrid Feder." Signed by Judge Sarala V. Nagala on 06/01/2023. (Kuegler, Adam)
|
| Filing 18 NOTICE to Correct Spelling of Defendants Name, by LaDean Daniels. (Mendez, D) |
|
Filing 17
ORDER. The Court is in receipt of Plaintiff's notice at ECF No. #16 requesting that the Court "process" his motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis ("IFP") because, although he has already paid the filing fee, he is concerned that he will not be able to pay the costs of service in this action. Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 4(c)(3) provides that "[a]t the plaintiff's request, the court may order that service be made by a United States marshal or deputy marshal or by a person specially appointed by the court." If--at the appropriate time for service--Plaintiff is unable to serve his complaint, then he may request that the Court order service to be made pursuant to Rule 4(c)(3). Accordingly, Plaintiff's request in ECF No. #16 is denied. Once the Court receives notice that the filing fee in this action has been paid, Plaintiff's complaint will proceed to initial review pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 1915A. If any of Plaintiff's claims proceed past initial review, the Court will provide further instruction regarding service of the complaint. Signed by Judge Sarala V. Nagala on 05/26/2023. (Kuegler, Adam)
|
| Filing 16 NOTICE of Request, by LaDean Daniels. (Mendez, D) |
|
Filing 15
ORDER granting #14 Motion for Extension of Time. Plaintiff's deadline for paying the filing fee in this action, in the manner set forth in the Court's order at ECF No. 13, is hereby extended until June 20, 2023. Signed by Judge Sarala V. Nagala on 05/19/2023. (Kuegler, Adam)
|
| Filing 14 MOTION for Extension of Time, by LaDean Daniels. (Mendez, D) |
|
Filing 13
ORDER granting in part #9 Motion for Extension of Time. Plaintiff's deadline for paying the filing fee in this action is hereby extended until June 2, 2023. Rather than make a partial payment to the Clerk's Office and pay the balance of the filing fee at a later date, Plaintiff shall pay the full filing fee of $402.00 in one payment. The Court is affording him additional time, beyond the extension requested, so that he may obtain the full filing fee and pay it in one payment. In light of Plaintiff's representations in ECF Nos. #9 and #10 that he expects to be able to pay the filing fee in this action and seeks to withdraw his motion to proceed in forma pauperis, his motions to proceed in forma pauperis, ECF Nos. #2 , #11 , are hereby denied as moot. Signed by Judge Sarala V. Nagala on 04/24/2023. (Kuegler, Adam)
|
| Filing 12 Prisoner Trust Fund Account Statement, by LaDean Daniels. (Mendez, D) |
| Filing 11 MOTION for Leave to Proceed in forma pauperis, by LaDean Daniels. (Mendez, D) |
| Filing 10 AFFIDAVIT, Signed By LaDean Daniels, filed by LaDean Daniels. (Mendez, D) |
| Filing 9 MOTION for Extension of Time, by LaDean Daniels. (Attachments: #1 Envelope) (Mendez, D) |
| Filing 8 NOTICE OF INSUFFICIENCY. The plaintiff has filed a motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis; in other words, he seeks to commence a federal lawsuit without pre-paying the filing fee. A federal law, 28 U.S.C. 1915, permits him to do so if, among other things, he files an affidavit demonstrating his inability to pay and a certified copy of his inmate trust account statement for the six month period preceding his complaint.In this case, the plaintiff has filed a copy of his inmate trust account statement showing six months of transactions but his application form is incomplete. The plaintiff has not filled out pages 4 or 5, which are the required authorization and certification pages. Additionally, a number of entries in his trust account statement demonstrate that his application to proceed in forma pauperis has not been filled out with the ''particularity, definiteness and certainty'' that the law requires. Escobedo v. Applebees, 787 F.3d 1226, 1234 (9th Cir. 2015). The plaintiff wrote on his application form that he has received $150 in gifts over the past twelve months and has no other income. His trust account statement, however, contains over $1,000 in deposits in the past six months.In determining if a plaintiff's financial circumstances qualify for in forma pauperis status, courts consider not only his personal resources, but also resources that an applicant ''has or can get from those who ordinarily provide the applicant with the necessities of life.'' Fridman v. City of New York, 195 F. Supp. 2d 534, 537 (S.D.N.Y. 2002). The court cannot fully evaluate the plaintiff's application unless and until it knows who made the deposits into his account, and that person's resources to pay the filing fee. The Clerk of the Court is respectfully directed to send the plaintiff a blank copy of the correct application form at his address of record. The plaintiff is therefore directed to file another application form (1) with the certification and authorization pages completed, and (2) that accurately sets forth the amount of money he has received and identifies the source of these deposits, along with a statement of that person's (or persons') financial resources. In other words, if, say, the deposits came from a family member, the plaintiff must say so, and must explain that family member's financial resources and ability to pay the fee. If he does not do so by April 28, 2023, his case may be dismissed. Finally, the plaintiff is respectfully reminded that the application form is signed under penalty of perjury and all of his entries on the form must be true, correct, and complete. Signed by Judge Thomas O. Farrish on 4/10/23.(Corriette, M.) |
|
Filing 7
ELECTRONIC FILING ORDER FOR COUNSEL - PLEASE ENSURE COMPLIANCE WITH COURTESY COPY REQUIREMENTS IN THIS ORDER. Signed by Judge Sarala V. Nagala on 4/6/2023. (Mendez, D)
|
|
Filing 6
STANDING ORDER ON PRISONER ELECTRONIC FILING PROGRAM. Signed by Judge Janet C. Hall on 4/6/2023. (Mendez, D)
|
|
Filing 5
STANDING PROTECTIVE ORDER. Signed by Judge Sarala V. Nagala on 4/6/2023. (Mendez, D)
|
| Filing 4 Notice: Pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 7.1, a disclosure statement must be filed with a party's first appearance, pleading, petition, motion, response, or other request addressed to the Court and must be supplemented if any required information changes during the case. Signed by Clerk on 4/6/2023. (Oliver, T.) |
| Filing 3 Prisoner Trust Fund Account Statement by LaDean Daniels. (Oliver, T.) |
| Filing 2 MOTION for Leave to Proceed in forma pauperis by LaDean Daniels. (Oliver, T.) |
| Filing 1 COMPLAINT against J. Brennan, Carlie, Cristien, Jane Doe, Fener, Jullian, Martin, K. Phillips, Yvonne, filed by LaDean Daniels. (Attachments: #1 copy of envelope) (Oliver, T.) |
| Judge Sarala V. Nagala 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.
