Lancaster v. Hill et al
| Christopher Lancaster |
| FNU Allen, FNU Tipton, FNU Ramos, John/Jane Doe, FNU Lee, D. Hurley, FNU Turner, FNU Ramon, FNU Kearny, FNU Rivera, J Brown, Dr. FNU Ramos, FNU Boberger, FNU Lopez, FNU Upchurch, FNU Hendrix, FNU Flagg, FNU Hill, FNU Gunthers and FNU Brimm |
| 5:2019cv00238 |
| May 13, 2019 |
| US District Court for the Middle District of Florida |
| Philip R Lammens |
| Carlos E Mendoza |
| Prisoner: Civil Rights |
| 28 U.S.C. ยง 1331 |
| Plaintiff |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on July 1, 2019. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Filing 8 MOTION for Extension of Time to File Order to Show Cause. by Christopher Lancaster. (RLK) |
Filing 7
ORDER Plaintiff to show cause within FOURTEEN (14) DAYS why he should not be subject to sanctions, including, but not limited to, the dismissal of the instant case without prejudice due to his failure to honestly apprise this Court of his litigation history. Signed by Magistrate Judge Philip R. Lammens on 6/14/2019. (CRR)
|
|
Filing 6
ORDER granting #2 Motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis/affidavit of indigency. Plaintiff shall pay an initial partial filing fee of $0.00 as provided in 28 U.S.C. ' 1915(b)(1)(A). Plaintiff is assessed the total $350.00 filing fee. The Clerk is directed to send a copy of this Order to the Supervisor, Inmate Trust Funds at Plaintiff's current place of incarceration. Signed by Magistrate Judge Philip R. Lammens on 6/14/2019. (CRR)
|
| Filing 5 NOTICE of pendency of related cases re #4 Related case order and track 1 notice per Local Rule 1.04(d) by Christopher Lancaster. Related case(s): no (JP) |
|
Filing 4
RELATED CASE ORDER AND NOTICE of designation under Local Rule 3.05 - track 1. Notice of pendency of other actions due by 6/5/2019. Signed by Judge Carlos E. Mendoza on 5/22/2019. (DJD) ctp
|
| Received confirmation email from Tucson USP as receiving Doc. 1 and 3. (CRR) |
|
Filing 3
ORDER REGARDING EMEREGENCY MOTION. The Clerk shall immediately transmit, via email and/or facsimile, a copy of The Civil Rights Complaint (Doc. 1) and this Order to the Warden of the institution at which the inmate is confined, in this case Tucson USP, for whatever action may be deemed appropriate in light of the inmate's allegations. This is merely a notification to appropriate officials and not a ruling on the merits of the case or the complaint. The Clerk shall confirm that such notification was received and make an entry on the docket reflecting that such notification was sent to the appropriate officials. Signed by Magistrate Judge Philip R. Lammens on 5/13/2019. (CRR)
|
| Filing 2 MOTION for leave to proceed in forma pauperis/affidavit of indigency by Lancaster Christopher. (RLK) Motions referred to Magistrate Judge Philip R. Lammens. |
| Filing 1 COMPLAINT against FNU Allen, FNU Boberger, FNU Brimm, J Brown, John/Jane Doe(Individually and Official Capacity as Complex SIA), John/Jane Doe(Individually and Official Capacity as Lieutenant Coleman II U.S.P), FNU Flagg, FNU Gunthers, FNU Hendrix, FNU Hill, D. Hurley, FNU Kearny, FNU Lee, FNU Lopez, FNU Ramon, FNU Ramos(Individually and Official Capacity as Psychologist U.S.P. Coleman II), FNU Ramos(Individually and Official Capacity as C.O. Coleman II U.S.P), FNU Rivera, FNU Tipton, FNU Turner, FNU Upchurch with Jury Demand filed by Lancaster Christopher. (no service copies provided)(RLK) |
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 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.
