v. NELSON et al
BRETT-ANDREW NELSON |
DONALD CORWIN JACKSON, LORI BETH TALBOT, ASHKEY MORGAN BURGEMEISTER, BEN RUSSELL, DAVID WHITE, KENNETH MURRAY PLOTZ, SETH RYAN, JOHN GALLOWICH, PATRICK MURPHY, KERI ANN YODER, CHRISTOPHER DANOS, MARK TREMBLE, PETER NOON, BENNET A. MORRIS, CITY OF GUNNISON COLORADO, CITY OF MONTROSE COLORADO, JUDICIARY COURTS FOR THE STATE OF COLORADO, PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF COLORADO and STATE OF COLORADO |
1:2022cv00338 |
January 31, 2022 |
US District Court for the District of Columbia |
Civil Rights: Other |
42 U.S.C. ยง 1983 Civil Rights Act |
Plaintiff |
Docket Report
This docket was last retrieved on March 16, 2022. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
Document Text |
---|
Filing 4 ORDER DISMISSING PRO SE CASE WITHOUT PREJUDICE. Ordered that the application of the plaintiff to proceed in forma pauperis is granted. Pro Se party has been notified by first class mail. Signed by Judge Amit P. Mehta on 03/16/2022. (zsb) |
Filing 3 MEMORANDUM OPINION. Signed by Judge Amit P. Mehta on 03/16/2022. (zsb) |
Filing 2 MOTION for Leave to Proceed in forma pauperis by BRETT-ANDREW NELSON. (znmw) |
Filing 1 COMPLAINT against All Defendants with Jury Demand filed by BRETT-ANDREW NELSON. (Attachments: #1 Exhibits)(znmw) |
Initiating Pleading & IFP Application Received on 1/31/2022. A copy of the docket sheet has been mailed to the address of record for the pro se party. (znmw) |
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 District Of Columbia 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.