Thomas v. Hughes
| Fredrick Devon Thomas |
| Hughes |
| 3:2022cv50186 |
| June 6, 2022 |
| US District Court for the Northern District of Illinois |
| Iain D Johnston |
| Margaret J Schneider |
| Civil Rights (Prison Condition) |
| 42 U.S.C. ยง 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights |
| None |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on June 22, 2022. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| ***Civil Case Terminated. (jp, ) |
Filing 4
ORDER; Plaintiff Fredrick Thomas initiated this civil rights action pro se under 42 U.S.C. 1983. At the same time, Plaintiff initiated another 42 U.S.C. 1983 civil rights action in Case No. 22 C 50185 (initial review of the complaint pending resolution of fee status). The two cases arise out of the same operative facts about soy meat causing Plaintiff to become ill, yet they are filed against separate defendants. Because the two cases should have been filed as one complaint, the Court directs the Clerk of Court to administratively close this case. The Court defers ruling on whether to add Hughes as a defendant to Case No. 22 C 50185 until initial review of that complaint. No filing fee shall be assessed, nor will a "strike" be assessed under 28 U.S.C. 1915(g). All pending motions in this case are denied as moot. Civil case terminated. Signed by the Honorable Iain D. Johnston on 6/8/2022: Mailed notice (yxp, )
|
| Filing 3 APPLICATION by Plaintiff Fredrick Devon Thomas for leave to proceed in forma pauperis (pg, ) |
| Filing 2 PRISONER CIVIL Cover Sheet (pg, ) |
| Filing 1 RECEIVED Complaint and 0 copies by Fredrick Devon Thomas (Attachments: #1 Envelope)(pg, ) |
| CASE ASSIGNED to the Honorable Iain D. Johnston and Honorable Margaret J. Schneider. Designated as Magistrate Judge the Honorable Margaret J. Schneider. Case assignment: Direct assignment. (pg, ) |
| 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. (pg, ) |
| MAILED copy of the Clerk's Notice entry along with the Joint Consent Form to Frederick Devon Thomas. (jp, ) |
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: Thomas v. Hughes | |
|---|---|
| Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
| Search Web | [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ] |
| Plaintiff: Fredrick Devon Thomas | |
| 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: Hughes | |
| 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.
