Hazle v. Dart et al
| Jeffery S Hazle, Jr |
| Tom Dart, Superintindent Martinez, Salvador Godinez, Chief Howell, Avery Heart, Doctor Minoch, Psych Worker Condon, Steven Young, Psych Worker Morgil, Lt. Galan, Sgt. Helm and Ofc Nelson |
| 1:2010cv05609 |
| September 2, 2010 |
| US District Court for the Northern District of Illinois |
| Chicago Office |
| Cook |
| William J. Hibbler |
| Prison Condition |
| 42 U.S.C. ยง 1983 |
| Plaintiff |
Follow case documents by RSS
Available Case Documents
The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing
3
WRITTEN Opinion signed by the Honorable William J. Hibbler on 10/1/2010. Plaintiff is given 30 days from the date of this order to either submit a completed in forma pauperis application or prepay the $350 filing fee. The Clerk shall send to P laintiff an informa pauperis application and an amended complaint form. Plaintiff's failure to satisfy the filing fee requirement within 30 days of this order will result in dismissal of this case without prejudice. Plaintiff should also consi der submitting an amended complaint within 30 days of this order to beter state his claims against the non-supervisory officials (Dr. Minoch, Condon, Young, Morgil, Galon, Helm and Nelson). To proceed against all the currently named defendants, plaintiff's amended complaint must state how each defendant was or is involved with the claims Plaintiff raises. Mailed notice (tlm)
|
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 Illinois Northern 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.
