Dixon v. Baldwin et al
Plaintiff: Marcus T. Dixon
Defendant: C/O Korte, Jacqueline Lashbrook, Amy Lang, John Baldwin, John Doe, Lt. Stock, Jose Delgado, Lt. Robinson and C/O Rucker
Case Number: 3:2019cv00825
Filed: July 30, 2019
Court: US District Court for the Southern District of Illinois
Presiding Judge: Staci M Yandle
Nature of Suit: Prison Condition
Cause of Action: 42:1983
Jury Demanded By: Plaintiff
Docket Report

This docket was last retrieved on February 7, 2020. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.

Date Filed Document Text
August 23, 2019 Opinion or Order Filing 7 ORDER: The Court has received your payment of the filing fee. Now the Court will review your complaint to identify legally sufficient claims and defendants and dismiss any legally insufficient claims. See 28 U.S.C. Sec. 1915A. The Court will conduct this review within the next 60 days and inform you of the findings in a Merit Review Order. No other action will be taken in your case during this time, absent extraordinary circumstances. Therefore, you do not need to submit any evidence, argument, motions, or other documents. If you filed a motion for recruitment of counsel along with your complaint, it will not be considered until the merit review is complete. Please note that any motion for recruitment of counsel must include evidence of your own efforts to find counsel, such as a list of the attorneys you contacted and copies of letters you sent or received. See Pruitt v. Mote, 503 F.3d 647, 654-55 (7th Cir. 2007). If you do not receive a Merit Review Order within the next 60 days, you may file a motion requesting the status of your case. In the event your claim(s) survive the merit review, further information and instruction will be provided to you at that time. In addition, several administrative matters warrant mention. Any communication directed to the Court should be in the form of a motion or other pleading and not a letter. A copy of the Notice and Consent to Proceed Before a Magistrate Judge form is attached to this Order. Finally, you are advised that if your address changes, you must notify the Court within seven days of the change by filing a Notice of Change of Address. Failure to do so could result in the dismissal of your case. Signed by Judge Staci M. Yandle on 8/23/2019. (tjk)
August 20, 2019 Filing fee: $ 400.00, receipt number 34625095413 (amv)
August 7, 2019 Opinion or Order Filing 6 ORDER DENYING Plaintiff's motion to proceed in forma pauperis ("IFP") (Doc. #5 ). A federal court may permit an indigent party to proceed without pre-payment of fees. 28 U.S.C. 1915(a)(1). The Court is not satisfied from Dixon's affidavit that he is indigent. Plaintiff's trust fund account balance as of June 28, 2019 was $729.59 (Doc. #5 ). Plaintiff lists no monthly expenses. Accordingly, the Court DENIES the motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis (Doc. #5 ). Plaintiff shall pay the $400.00 filing fee no later than 30 DAYS (September 6, 2019). Failure to comply with this Order will result in dismissal of this action for failure to comply with a court order under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(b). Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b). See generally Ladien v. Astrachan, 128 F.3d 1051 (7th Cir. 1997); Johnson v. Kamminga, 34 F.3d 466 (7th Cir. 1994). Plaintiff's first Motion to Proceed IFP (Doc. #2 ) is DENIED as moot. Signed by Judge Staci M. Yandle on 8/7/2019. (tjk)THIS TEXT ENTRY IS AN ORDER OF THE COURT. NO FURTHER DOCUMENTATION WILL BE MAILED.
August 6, 2019 Filing 5 MOTION for Leave to Proceed in forma pauperis by Marcus T. Dixon. (jaj)
August 2, 2019 Opinion or Order Filing 4 ORDER: On July 30, 2019, Plaintiff filed this action, along with an unsigned motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis ("IFP") (Doc. #2 ). Rule 11(a) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure requires that "[e]very pleading, written motion, and other paper must be signed... by a party personally if the party is unrepresented." To proceed with this action, Plaintiff is ORDERED to submit a properly signed Motion for Leave to Proceed in forma pauperis on or before August 16, 2019. Failure to comply with this order shall result in the striking of Plaintiff's IFP Motion and denial of IFP. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b). To enable Plaintiff to comply with this Order, the CLERK is DIRECTED to return a copy of the IFP Motion to Plaintiff along with this Order. (Action due by 8/16/2019). Signed by Judge Staci M. Yandle on 8/2/2019. (tjk)THIS TEXT ENTRY IS AN ORDER OF THE COURT. NO FURTHER DOCUMENTATION WILL BE MAILED.
July 30, 2019 Opinion or Order Filing 3 NOTICE AND ORDER: The Court has received your complaint and your motion to proceed without prepayment of the filing fee. Your case number is 19-825-SMY. The following is some information you should know regarding the initial stages of your lawsuit. After your filing fee status is determined, the Court will review your complaint to identify legally sufficient claims and defendants and dismiss any legally insufficient claims. See: 28 U.S.C. Sec. 1915A. The Court will conduct this review within the next 60 days and inform you of the findings in a Merit Review Order. No other action will be taken in your case during this time, absent extraordinary circumstances. Therefore, you do not need to submit any evidence, argument, motions, or other documents. If you filed a motion for recruitment of counsel along with your complaint, it will not be considered until the merit review is complete. Please note that any motion for recruitment of counsel must include evidence of your own efforts to find counsel, such as a list of the attorneys you contacted and copies of letters you sent or received. See Pruitt v. Mote, 503 F.3d 647, 654-55 (7th Cir. 2007). If you do not receive a Merit Review Order within the next 60 days, you may file a motion requesting the status of your case. In the event your claim(s) survive the merit review, further information and instruction will be provided to you at that time. In addition, several administrative matters warrant mention. Any communication directed to the Court should be in the form of a motion or other pleading and not a letter. All mail should be sent to: Clerk's Office, U.S. District Court, 750 Missouri Avenue, East St. Louis, IL 62201. A copy of the Notice and Consent to Proceed Before a Magistrate Judge form is attached to this Order. Finally, you are advised that if your address changes, you must notify the Court within seven days of the change by filing a Notice of Change of Address. Failure to do so could result in the dismissal of your case. Signed by Judge Staci M. Yandle on 7/30/2019. (jaj)
July 30, 2019 Filing 2 MOTION for Leave to Proceed in forma pauperis by Marcus T. Dixon. (jaj)
July 30, 2019 Filing 1 COMPLAINT against All Defendants filed by Marcus T. Dixon.(jaj)

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 Southern District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: Dixon v. Baldwin et al
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Defendant: C/O Korte
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: Jacqueline Lashbrook
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: Amy Lang
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: John Baldwin
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: John Doe
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: Lt. Stock
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: Jose Delgado
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: Lt. Robinson
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: C/O Rucker
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 ]
Plaintiff: Marcus T. Dixon
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.


Why Is My Information Online?