Green v. Lake Behavioral Hospital et al
| Cassidy Green |
| Lake Behavioral Hospital, Von' Celle Doe, John Doe(s) and Jane Doe(s) |
| 1:2022cv01110 |
| March 1, 2022 |
| US District Court for the Northern District of Illinois |
| John Robert Blakey |
| Other Statutory Actions |
| 28 U.S.C. ยง 1331 Federal Question |
| None |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on April 26, 2022. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Filing 9 ENTERED JUDGMENT. Mailed notice. (kp, ) |
| Filing 8 MINUTE entry before the Honorable John Robert Blakey: On 3/28/22, this Court denied Plaintiff's motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis and advised him that if he wished to proceed with the case he must pay the filing fee by 4/15/22. See #7 . To date, Plaintiff has not paid the filing fee. Nor has he otherwise communicated with the Court. Accordingly, consistent with the Court's prior order, this case is dismissed. Civil case terminated. Mailed notice. (kp, ) |
| Filing 7 MINUTE entry before the Honorable John Robert Blakey: The Court denies Plaintiff's motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis #6 because his application is incomplete, and because the information he does provide demonstrates that he is ineligible for pauper status. In particular, under sources of income, Plaintiffs lists a $30,000 settlement or judgment, #6 at 1, and he also admits that he is able to afford the initial filing fee, id. at 3. For the same reason, the Court denies Plaintiff's motion for attorney representation #3 . If Plaintiff wishes to pursue this case, he must pay the $402 filing fee by 4/15/22. If he fails to do so, the Court will dismiss this case. Mailed notice (gel, ) |
| Filing 6 APPLICATION by Plaintiff Cassidy Green for leave to proceed in forma pauperis (Exhibits). (Envelope postmarked 3/14/22) (aee, ) |
| Filing 5 LETTER from Cassidy Green dated 3/14/22. (Envelope postmarked 3/14/22) (aee, ) |
| Filing 4 MINUTE entry before the Honorable John Robert Blakey: Plaintiff submitted a pro se complaint, but has neither paid the filing fee nor requested leave to proceed in forma pauperis. Plaintiff must do one or the other by 3/31/22 or the Court will summarily dismiss this case. Mailed notice (gel, ) |
| MAILED copy of the Clerk's Notice entry along with the Joint Consent Form to Plaintiff. (aee, ) |
| CLERK'S NOTICE: Pursuant to Local Rule 73.1(b), a United States Magistrate Judge of this court is available to conduct all proceedings in this civil action. If all parties consent to have the currently assigned United States Magistrate Judge conduct all proceedings in this case, including trial, the entry of final judgment, and all post-trial proceedings, all parties must sign their names on the attached #Consent To# form. This consent form is eligible for filing only if executed by all parties. The parties can also express their consent to jurisdiction by a magistrate judge in any joint filing, including the Joint Initial Status Report or proposed Case Management Order. (aee, ) |
| Filing 3 MOTION by Plaintiff Cassidy Green for attorney representation. (aee, ) |
| Filing 2 CIVIL Cover Sheet. (aee, ) |
| Filing 1 RECEIVED Complaint and no copies by Cassidy Green. (aee, ) |
| CASE ASSIGNED to the Honorable John Robert Blakey. Designated as Magistrate Judge the Honorable Beth W. Jantz. FEE DUE, NO INFORMA PAUPERIS APPLICATION SUBMITTED. Case assignment: Random assignment. (aee, ) |
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.
