Ronet v. State of Florida et al
| Jean-Pierre Ronet and Alan Dennis Peterson |
| State of Florida, City of Tampa, USDC, District of Columbia, James Uthmeier, Susan S. Lopez, Amarea Zelmar, Dane Nessel, Gregory Dill, Christopher M. Frest, Kris Mayers, Rachel Mitchell and Charles L, Cohey |
| 8:2026cv02245 |
| August 4, 2026 |
| U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Florida |
| Mary S Scriven |
| Thomas G Wilson |
| Civil Rights: Other |
| 42 U.S.C. ยง 1983 Civil Rights Act |
| None |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on August 5, 2026. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Filing 3 NOTICE to Jean-Pierre Ronet - A pro se litigant may consent to receive Notices of Electronic Filings by completing the consent form linked #here or by visiting the court's website at https://www.flmd.uscourts.gov/litigants-without-lawyers. (CTR) |
| Filing 2 MOTION to Proceed In Forma Pauperis / Affidavit of Indigency by Jean-Pierre Ronet. (Attachments: #1 Mailing Envelope)(CTR) Motions referred to Magistrate Judge Thomas G. Wilson. |
| Filing 1 COMPLAINT against City of Tampa, Charles L, Cohey, Gregory Dill, Christopher M. Frest, Susan S. Lopez, Kris Mayers, Rachel Mitchell, Dane Nessel, State of Florida, USDC, District of Columbia, James Uthmeier, Amarea Zelmar filed by Jean-Pierre Ronet. (Attachments: #1 Civil Cover Sheet, #2 Mailing Envelope)(CTR) |
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.
