Lorch v. Dixon et al
| Christopher Lorch |
| Lee Dixon, Courtney Jones, FNU Brown and FNU Anderson |
| 2:2025cv00702 |
| August 7, 2025 |
| U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Florida |
| John L Badalamenti |
| Nicholas P Mizell |
| Prisoner: Civil Rights |
| 42 U.S.C. ยง 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights |
| Plaintiff |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on October 6, 2025. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing 5
ENDORSED ORDER denying as moot #4 Plaintiff's motion to proceed in forma pauperis. This case was dismissed without prejudice on August 15, 2025. Signed by Magistrate Judge Nicholas P. Mizell on 10/6/2025. (LTG)
|
| Filing 4 MOTION to Proceed In Forma Pauperis by Christopher Lorch (e-portal). (FLY) Motions referred to Magistrate Judge Nicholas P. Mizell. |
| Filing 3 NOTICE of inquiry by Christopher Lorch. Clerk responded with courtesy copy of blank Civil Rights Complaint Form (prisoner) and Application to Proceed In Forma Pauperis (prisoner). (Attachments: #1 Mailing Envelope) (FLY) |
|
Filing 2
ORDER dismissing case. The Clerk is directed to deny any pending motions as moot and to CLOSE this file. Signed by Judge John L. Badalamenti on 8/15/2025. (BGS)
|
| Filing 1 COMPLAINT against All Defendants with Jury Demand filed by Christopher Lorch (e-portal). Only 1 page received. No IFP or Service Copies received. (FLY) |
Access additional case information on PACER
Use the links below to access additional information about this case on the U.S. Court's PACER system. A subscription to PACER is required.
Access this case on the Florida Middle 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.
