Johnson v. Trump et al
| Robert W. Johnson |
| Donald J. Trump, Facebook, Meta, Rudy Giuliani, John Eastman, Mark Meadows, Kenneth Chesebro, Jeffrey Clark, Jenna Ellis, Ray Smith, III, Robert Cheeley, Cathleen Latham, Scott Hall, Stephen Lee, Harrison Floyd, Trevian Kutti, Sidney Powell, Misty Hampton, Michael Roman, David Shafer, Shawn Still, Vldimir Putin, Twitter and Meta LLC |
| 3:2023cv01145 |
| August 28, 2023 |
| US District Court for the District of Connecticut |
| Thomas O Farrish |
| Jeffrey A Meyer |
| Civil Rights: Other |
| Plaintiff |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on October 10, 2023. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing 8
ORDER: The motion for default judgment is DENIED as moot because the Court closed this case on August 30, 2023 (Doc. # 4 ). It is so ordered. Signed by Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer on 10/10/2023. (Odio, C.)
|
| Filing 7 MOTION for Default Judgment by Robert W. Johnson. (Attachments: #1 Envelope)(Chartier, A) |
| Filing 6 CLERK'S CERTIFICATE RE: INDEX AND RECORD ON APPEAL re: #5 Notice of Appeal. The attached docket sheet is hereby certified as the entire Index/Record on Appeal in this matter and electronically sent to the Court of Appeals, with the exception of any manually filed documents as noted below. Dinah Milton Kinney, Clerk. Documents manually filed not included in this transmission: none (Chartier, A) |
| Filing 5 NOTICE OF APPEAL as to 4 Order on Motion for Leave to File, Order on Motion for Leave to Proceed in forma pauperis, by Robert W. Johnson. (Attachments: #1 Envelope)(Chartier, A) |
|
Filing 4
ORDER. The Court DENIES the motion for leave to file a complaint (Doc. #1 ). In light of the plaintiff's prior abuse of process, he is subject to an order of this Court that he file a motion for leave to file a complaint and that any such motion be accompanied by a proposed complaint. See Johnson v. Vera House, Inc., No. 3:22CV00314(SALM), 2022 WL 829337, at *5 (D. Conn. Mar. 18, 2022) (To seek leave of the Court to file a new action in this District, Mr. Johnson shall file a motion of no more than three pages captioned Application Pursuant to Court Order Seeking Leave to File. He shall attach to this motion as Exhibit 1 the proposed Complaint he seeks to file. He shall attach as Exhibit 2 to the motion a copy of this Order.). Because plaintiff has filed a motion but not a copy of a proposed amended complaint, the Court DENIES the motion for leave to file a complaint. To the extent that plaintiff's motion includes allegations, they are too cursory to sustain plausible grounds for relief. The Court DENIES as moot the motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis (Doc. #2 ). The Clerk of Court shall close this case. It is so ordered.. Signed by Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer on 8/30/2023. (Lewis, D) Modified on 8/30/2023 (Lewis, D).
|
| Filing 3 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 8/28/2023.(Chartier, A) |
| Filing 2 MOTION for Leave to Proceed in forma pauperis by Robert W. Johnson. (Chartier, A) |
| Filing 1 Motion for Leave to file complaint filed by Robert W. Johnson. (Attachments: #1 Envelope)(Chartier, A) Modified event on 8/29/2023 (Pesta, J.). |
| Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer and Judge Thomas O. Farrish added. (Shafer, J.) |
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.
