Brooks v. Naphcare et al
| Maurice Brooks |
| Naphcare, Rick Wells and Manatee County Jail |
| 8:2021cv02399 |
| October 12, 2021 |
| US District Court for the Middle District of Florida |
| William F Jung |
| Anthony E Porcelli |
| Prisoner: Civil Rights |
| 42 U.S.C. ยง 1983 |
| None |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on August 30, 2022. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing 4
ORDER granting #2 Motion to Proceed In Forma Pauperis, to the extent that the case may proceed without the prepayment of the entire filing fee. Because Plaintiff has less than a $10.00 balance in his prison trust fund account, the Court will not require Plaintiff to pay an initial partial filing fee as provided in 28 U.S.C. 1915(b)(1)(A). However, Plaintiff is hereby assessed the total $350.00 filing fee in this case (see order for details). Signed by Magistrate Judge Anthony E. Porcelli on 11/15/2021. (LV) Modified text on 11/16/2021 (MCB).
|
|
Filing 3
STANDING ORDER for all confined, pro se litigants. Signed by Judge William F. Jung on 10/14/2021. (ABC)
|
| Filing 2 MOTION to Proceed In Forma Pauperis / Affidavit of Indigency by Maurice Brooks. (Attachments: #1 Mailing Envelope)(ABC) Motions referred to Magistrate Judge Anthony E. Porcelli. |
| Filing 1 COMPLAINT against All Defendants filed by Maurice Brooks. (Attachments: #1 Mailing Envelope)(ABC) |
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.
