Smith v. Hughes et al
| Antonio Smith |
| M. Davey, Adriana Rodriguez, . Cameron, Terri Cromwell, K. Patrick, . Hudson, LeAnn Miller, Steven Majors, Jared Bohland, Steven Campbell, C. Victor, Julie Globokar and LaToya Hughes |
| 3:2024cv03265 |
| September 23, 2024 |
| U.S. District Court for the Central District of Illinois |
| James E Shadid |
| Prisoner Petitions - Prison Conditions |
| 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights |
| Plaintiff |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on November 21, 2024. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Set/Reset Deadlines: Prisoner Prepayment due by 12/6/2024 (ANW) |
Filing 18
ORDER Entered by Judge James E. Shadid on 11/19/24. IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED:1) Plaintiff's Motions #14 #16 #17 are DENIED. 2) Plaintiff shall pay the $405.00 filing fee in full by December 6, 2024. Failure to do so will result in dismissal of this case without prejudice. SEE FULL WRITTEN ORDER. (ANW)
|
|
TEXT ORDER OF REASSIGNMENT entered by Chief Judge Sara Darrow on 11/17/2024. This case and the corresponding hearings are reassigned to Judge James E. Shadid for further proceedings.
|
| Filing 17 MOTION for Injunctive Relief by Plaintiff Antonio Smith. Responses due by 11/26/2024 (RES) |
| Filing 16 MOTION Three Strike Waiver Request by Plaintiff Antonio Smith. Responses due by 11/22/2024 (RES) |
| Filing 15 NOTICE: Supplemental Claim to Statement of Facts by Plaintiff Antonio Smith (RES) |
| Filing 14 MOTION for Protective Order by Plaintiff Antonio Smith. Responses due by 11/22/2024 (RES) |
| Filing 13 AMENDED COMPLAINT against All Defendants, filed by Antonio Smith.(SAG) |
|
Filing 12
ORDER entered by Chief Judge Sara Darrow on 10/31/2024. IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED:1) Plaintiff's Motion #5 is DENIED with leave to renew. 2) Plaintiff's Motion #6 is DENIED. 3) Plaintiff's Motion for Leave to File Amended Complaint #11 is GRANTED. Clerk is directed to docket the proposed amended complaint attached to Plaintiff's motion. 4) Plaintiff's Petition to Proceed in forma pauperis #3 is DENIED. Plaintiff shall, within 21 days of this Order, pay the $405.00 filing fee in full. Failure to do so will result in dismissal of this case without prejudice. SEE FULL WRITTEN ORDER. (SAG)
|
| Filing 11 MOTION for Leave to File Amended Complaint by Plaintiff Antonio Smith. Responses due by 11/13/2024 (RES) |
| Filing 10 Amended Relief Requested regarding #1 Complaint by Plaintiff Antonio Smith (RES) |
| Filing 9 NOTICE: Statement of Facts by Plaintiff Antonio Smith (RES) |
| Filing 8 NOTICE: Statement of Facts by Plaintiff Antonio Smith (RES) |
| Filing 7 Exhibits by Antonio Smith. (RES) |
| Filing 6 MOTION for Leave to File Amended Complaint by Plaintiff Antonio Smith. Responses due by 10/17/2024 (RES) |
| Filing 2 NOTICE OF CASE OPENING. Please be advised that your case has been assigned to Chief Judge Sara Darrow. Effective immediately, all documents should be mailed or scanned to the Rock Island Division, 322 16th Street, Rock Island, IL 61201.Merit Review Deadline set for 10/15/2024. (Attachments: #1 Notice Regarding Privacy Issues)(ANW) |
| Filing 5 MOTION to Request Counsel by Plaintiff Antonio Smith. Responses due by 10/7/2024 (ANW) |
| Filing 4 +++ PRISONER TRUST FUND LEDGER by Antonio Smith (ANW) |
| Filing 3 PETITION TO PROCEED IN FORMA PAUPERIS, filed by Antonio Smith.(ANW) |
| Filing 1 COMPLAINT against All Defendants, filed by Antonio Smith.(ANW) |
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 Illinois Central 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.
