Jones v. AFSCME Council 31 et al
| Charles Jones |
| AFSCME Council 31, Glendora Marshall, David Dover, Patrick Armstrong, Roberta Lynch and Stephen Mittens |
| 1:2019cv06793 |
| October 15, 2019 |
| US District Court for the Northern District of Illinois |
| Thomas M Durkin |
| Contract: Other |
| 28 U.S.C. § 1332 |
| Plaintiff |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on November 22, 2019. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Filing 21 ENTERED JUDGMENT Signed on 11/22/2019:Mailed notice(srn, ) |
Filing 20
ORDER: For the foregoing reasons, plaintiff Charles Jones' ("Plaintiff") second amended complaint #19 is dismissed with prejudice. Further, to the extent Plaintiff intended to move for approval of an in forma pauperis application and/or for attorney representation through the attachments to his second amended complaint, those requests are denied as moot. Civil case terminated. Signed by the Honorable Thomas M. Durkin on 11/22/2019:Mailed notice(srn, )
|
| Filing 19 RECEIVED SECOND AMENDED Complaint by Charles Jones (Exhibits) (bg, ) |
| Filing 18 MINUTE entry before the Honorable Thomas M. Durkin:Plaintiff's motion for extension of time to 1/27/2020 to file an amended complaint #17 is granted.Mailed notice (srn, ) |
| Filing 17 MOTION by Plaintiff Charles Jones for notice for extension time. (Exhibit) (pk, ) |
|
Filing 16
ORDER: For the foregoing reasons, plaintiff Charles Jones' ("Plaintiff") amended complaint #13 is dismissed without prejudice. Plaintiff's in forma pauperis application #11 and motion for attorney representation #10 are denied as moot. Signed by the Honorable Thomas M. Durkin on 10/25/2019. Mailed notice(pk, )
|
| Filing 13 RECEIVED Amended Complaint and by Charles Jones. (Exhibits) (pk, ) |
| Filing 12 PRO SE Appearance by Plaintiff Charles Jones (pk, ) |
| Filing 11 APPLICATION by Plaintiff Charles Jones for leave to proceed in forma pauperis (pk, ) |
| Filing 10 MOTION by Plaintiff Charles Jones for attorney representation (pk, ) |
|
Filing 9
ORDER: For the foregoing reasons, plaintiff Charles Jones' ("Plaintiff") complaint is dismissed without prejudice. Plaintiff's in forma pauperis application #4 and motion for attorney representation #5 are denied as moot. Signed by the Honorable Thomas M. Durkin on 10/18/2019. Mailed notice(pk, )
|
| 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. (pk, ) |
| Filing 5 MOTION by Plaintiff Charles Jones for attorney representation. (Exhibits) (pk, ) |
| Filing 4 APPLICATION by Plaintiff Charles Jones for leave to proceed in forma pauperis (pk, ) |
| Filing 3 PRO SE Appearance by Plaintiff Charles Jones (pk, ) |
| Filing 2 CIVIL Cover Sheet (pk, ) |
| Filing 1 RECEIVED Complaint and 1 copy by Charles Jones (Exhibits) (pk, ) |
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.
