Pollard-Shillingford v. University of Southern Indiana et al
Zinda Pollard-Shillingford |
Samantha Sawyer, Amy Wilson and University of Southern Indiana |
1:2019cv00088 |
January 4, 2019 |
US District Court for the Northern District of Illinois |
Jorge L Alonso |
Civil Rights: Americans with Disabilities - Other |
28 U.S.C. ยง 1331 |
None |
Docket Report
This docket was last retrieved on February 28, 2019. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
Document Text |
---|
Filing 15 ENTERED JUDGMENT on 2/28/2019. Notice mailed by judge's staff(ntf, ) |
Filing 14 ORDER. This case is transferred to the United States District Court for the Southern District of Indiana. The case is terminated on this Court's docket. [For further details see order.] Signed by the Honorable Jorge L. Alonso on 2/28/2019. Notice mailed by judge's staff (ntf, ) |
Filing 13 MINUTE entry before the Honorable Jorge L. Alonso: Order #11 and judgment #12 entered 2/28/19 were entered in error and are vacated. Notice mailed by judge's staff (ntf, ) |
Filing 12 ENTERED JUDGMENT on 2/28/2019. Notice mailed by judge's staff (ntf, ) |
Filing 11 ORDER. Plaintiff's amended complaint #10 is dismissed, without prejudice to refiling the complaint, along with any accompanying in forma pauperis application, in the Southern District of Indiana. Civil case terminated. Signed by the Honorable Jorge L. Alonso on 2/28/2019. Notice mailed by judge's staff (ntf, ) |
Filing 10 RECEIVED Complaint and 0 copies by Zinda Pollard-Shillingford. (Exhibits) (nsf, ) |
MAILED a blank amended complaint with a copy of the Order dated 2/7/2019 to the Plaintiff. (jh, ) |
Filing 9 ORDER: Plaintiff Zinda Pollard-Shillingford, pro se, seeks permission to proceed in forma pauperis ("IFP") in this suit. Because plaintiff does not have sufficient assets to pay the filing fee, her IFP application #4 is granted. However, plaintiffs allegations are not sufficient to survive this Court's initial screening, so the complaint is dismissed without prejudice. Plaintiff may file an amended complaint by March 1, 2019, if she can cure the defects identified in this order and state a claim in compliance with the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. Plaintiff's motion for attorney representation #5 is denied without prejudice. Signed by the Honorable Jorge L. Alonso on 2/7/2019. Mailed notice(jh, ) |
Filing 8 NOTICE TO THE PARTIES - The Court is participating in the Mandatory Initial Discovery Pilot (MIDP). The key features and deadlines are set forth in this Notice which includes a link to the (MIDP) Standing Order and a Checklist for use by the parties. In cases subject to the pilot, all parties must respond to the mandatory initial discovery requests set forth in the Standing Order before initiating any further discovery in this case. Please note: The discovery obligations in the Standing Order supersede the disclosures required by Rule 26(a)(1). Any party seeking affirmative relief must serve a copy of the following documents (Notice of Mandatory Initial Discovery and the Standing Order) on each new party when the Complaint, Counterclaim, Crossclaim, or Third-Party Complaint is served. (ek, ) |
Filing 5 MOTION by Plaintiff Zinda Pollard-Shillingford for attorney representation (ek, ) |
Filing 4 APPLICATION by Plaintiff Zinda Pollard-Shillingford for leave to proceed in forma pauperis (ek, ) |
Filing 3 PRO SE Appearance by Plaintiff Zinda Pollard-Shillingford (ek, ) |
Filing 2 CIVIL Cover Sheet (ek, ) |
Filing 1 RECEIVED Complaint and three (3) copies by Zinda Pollard-Shillingford (ek, ) |
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 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.