Monroe v. Lamont et al
| Timothy C. Monroe |
| Ned Lamont and Department of Corrections |
| 3:2023cv01584 |
| December 4, 2023 |
| US District Court for the District of Connecticut |
| Victor A Bolden |
| Robert A Richardson |
| Prisoner Petitions - Prison Conditions |
| 42 U.S.C. ยง 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights |
| None |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on January 19, 2024. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| 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. At the time plaintiff filed his motion he was incarcerated and thus subject to the federal law, 28 U.S.C. 1915, which among other things, allows prisoners to seek in forma pauperis status if they submit (1) a financial affidavit showing that they are unable to pay, and (2) a certified copy of their inmate trust account statement for the six month period preceding their complaint. In this case, the plaintiff left the financial affidavit form entirely blank. He also did not provide a certified copy of his inmate trust account statement.The Court understands that the plaintiff has since been released from prison, indicated by the updated address on the docket. Because he has been released, he is no longer required to file a certified copy of his inmate trust account statement. See Perez v. Bryant, No. 20-cv-0079 (CM), 2020 WL 2857156, at *1 ("Upon a prisoner's release, his obligation to pay fees is to be determined, like any non-prisoner, solely by whether he qualifies for in forma pauperis status. A released prisoner may litigate without further prepayment of fees upon satisfying the poverty affidavit requirement applicable to all non-prisoners."). But he is still required to file a complete, filled-out financial affidavit form.Given this, the Clerk of the Court is respectfully directed to send plaintiff a blank copy of the standard non-prisoner application form at his address of record. The plaintiff is directed to fill out the form completely and accurately, and to file it with the Clerk of the Court. If he does not do so by February 8, 2024, his case may be dismissed. Signed by Judge Thomas O. Farrish on 1/19/2024.(Corriette, M.) |
Filing 7
Standing PROTECTIVE ORDER Signed by Judge Victor A. Bolden on 12/4/2023.(Barry, L)
|
|
Filing 6
ELECTRONIC FILING ORDER FOR COUNSEL - PLEASE ENSURE COMPLIANCE WITH COURTESY COPY REQUIREMENTS IN THIS ORDER Signed by Judge Victor A. Bolden on 12/4/2023.(Barry, L)
|
|
Filing 5
Order on Pretrial Deadlines: Amended Pleadings due by 2/2/2024 Discovery due by 6/4/2024 Dispositive Motions due by 7/9/2024 Signed by Clerk on 12/4/2023.(Barry, L)
|
| 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 12/4/2023.(Imbriani, Susan) |
| Filing 3 MOTION to Appoint Counsel by Timothy C. Monroe. (Imbriani, Susan) |
| Filing 2 MOTION for Leave to Proceed in forma pauperis by Timothy C. Monroe. (Imbriani, Susan) |
| Filing 1 COMPLAINT against Department of Corrections, Ned Lamont, filed by Timothy C. Monroe.(Imbriani, Susan) |
| Judge Victor A. Bolden and Judge Robert A. Richardson 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.
