Rogers v. Blau
| Etheleen Rogers |
| David Blau |
| 1:2023cv03206 |
| May 19, 2023 |
| US District Court for the Northern District of Illinois |
| John J Tharp |
| Civil Rights: Other |
| 42 U.S.C. ยง 1983 Civil Rights Act |
| Plaintiff |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on June 20, 2023. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Filing 9 MINUTE entry before the Honorable John J. Tharp, Jr: The Court has received a package of documents from the plaintiff without any pleading, motion, or other explanation as to their significance. The Court will not cull through these documents in order to ascertain what relevance, if any, they have to this law suit, and supplying an undifferentiated collection of documents does not suffice as an amended complaint, Plaintiff is advised that she is required to submit an adequate in forma pauperis petition and an amended complaint. The Court will, however, extend Plaintiff's deadline to do so to 7/14/23. Failure to comply will result in dismissal of this case. Mailed notice (air, ) |
Filing 8
ORDER: Plaintiff's application to proceed in forma pauperis #3 is denied because it is incomplete. Question 1 is unanswered. Many answers in question 3 are left blank. As for question 4, the plaintiff answers she does have money in a bank account but does not state how much as required by the question. Further, in reviewing an in forma pauperis application, courts must also screen the complaint. 28 U.S.C. 1915(e)(2); Luevano v. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc., 722 F.3d 1014, 1022-23 (7th Cir. 2013). The complaint does not contain any allegations suggesting that this Court has jurisdiction over the case. The allegations in the complaint suggest that an attorney, a private actor, declined to represent the plaintiff in a judicial proceeding, which does not give rise to a federal question. And there are no allegations suggesting that diversity jurisdiction exists. Even if everything the plaintiff is alleging is true, there is no basis to conclude from the complaint that this case presents a federal question, a controversy of over $75,000 between citizens of different states, or any other type of case that is properly filed in federal court. The complaint is therefore dismissed without prejudice. An amended complaint fixing the jurisdictional issue must be filed by 6/23/23. The renewed motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis must be filed by then as well. Failure to comply will result in termination of this case. Signed by the Honorable John J. Tharp, Jr on 5/26/2023. Mailed notice(gcy, )
|
| MAILED copy of the Clerk's Notice entry along with the Joint Consent Form to Plaintiff. (jg, ) |
| 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. (jg, ) |
| Filing 5 PRO SE Appearance by Plaintiff Etheleen Rogers. (jg, ) |
| Filing 4 MOTION by Plaintiff Etheleen Rogers for attorney representation. (jg, ) |
| Filing 3 APPLICATION by Plaintiff Etheleen Rogers for leave to proceed in forma pauperis. (jg, ) |
| Filing 2 CIVIL Cover Sheet (jg, ) |
| Filing 1 RECEIVED COMPLAINT and 0 copies by Etheleen Rogers; Jury Demand. (Attachments) (jg, ) |
| CASE ASSIGNED to the Honorable John J. Tharp, Jr. Designated as Magistrate Judge the Honorable Maria Valdez. Case assignment: Random assignment. (jg, ) |
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
| Search for this case: Rogers v. Blau | |
|---|---|
| Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
| Search Web | [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ] |
| Plaintiff: Etheleen Rogers | |
| Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
| Search Finance | [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ] |
| Search Web | [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ] |
| Defendant: David Blau | |
| Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
| Search Finance | [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ] |
| Search Web | [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ] |
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.
