Brown v. Brown et al
| Maurice Brown |
| Thelma Brown and Joseph Brown |
| 1:2019cv01261 |
| February 20, 2019 |
| US District Court for the Northern District of Illinois |
| Jorge L Alonso |
| Other Statutory Actions |
| 28 U.S.C. ยง 1331 |
| None |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on April 15, 2019. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing 10
ORDER. Plaintiff Maurice Brown, pro se, seeks permission to proceed in forma pauperis ("IFP") in this suit. Because plaintiff does not have sufficient funds to pay the filing fee, his renewed IFP application #9 is granted. However, plaintiff's allegations are not sufficient to survive the Court's initial screening, and the complaint is dismissed without prejudice. Plaintiff may file an amended complaint by May 20, 2019, if he wishes to pursue this matter and can state a claim in compliance with this Order and with the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. Signed by the Honorable Jorge L. Alonso on 4/15/2019. Notice mailed by judge's staff (ntf, )
|
| Filing 9 APPLICATION by Plaintiff Maurice Brown for leave to proceed in forma pauperis; Exhibit. (ew, ) |
|
Filing 8
ORDER: Pro se plaintiff Maurice Brown's motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis #4 is denied without prejudice because it is incomplete. In particular, Mr. Brown's response to question number 2 is deficient. Mr. Brown says that he is not employed, but he does not provide the Court with any information regarding his employment history. Mr. Brown's response to question number 4 is likewise deficient. Mr. Brown says that he lives in an assisted living facility, but he does not provide the Court with any information related to his living situation, such as how he supports himself. By 4/8/19, Mr. Brown must either (1) submit a renewed IFP application, or (2) pay the full statutory filing fee of $400.00. If he fails to comply with this Order, the Court will summarily dismiss this case. Signed by the Honorable Jorge L. Alonso on 3/11/2019. Mailed notice. (ew, )
|
| Filing 7 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. (ew, ) |
| Filing 4 APPLICATION by Plaintiff Maurice Brown for leave to proceed in forma pauperis. (ew, ) |
| Filing 3 PRO SE Appearance by Plaintiff Maurice Brown. (ew, ) |
| Filing 2 CIVIL Cover Sheet. (ew, ) |
| Filing 1 RECEIVED Complaint and two copies by Maurice Brown. (ew, ) |
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.
