Ellison v. Finley et al
| Bennie K. Ellison |
| Craig Finley, Christina Batson, Kevin Byrne, Investigator Muhammad, Lisa Daniels, Rob Jeffrey, Sarah Johnson, Christopher G. Perrin and Timothy J. Joyce |
| 3:2022cv02037 |
| August 31, 2022 |
| US District Court for the Southern District of Illinois |
| Nancy J Rosenstengel |
| Prisoner: Civil Rights |
| 42 U.S.C. ยง 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights |
| Plaintiff |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on March 20, 2024. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing 11
MOTION to Vacate #8 Order Dismissing Case, #9 Clerk's Judgment by Bennie K. Ellison. (jaj)
|
|
Filing 9
CLERK'S JUDGMENT. Approved by Chief Judge Nancy J. Rosenstengel on 10/7/2022. (anp)
|
|
Filing 10
CONSENT/NON-CONSENT TO U.S. MAGISTRATE JUDGE - sealed pending receipt from all parties. (jlh)
|
|
Filing 8
ORDER DISMISSING CASE. Signed by Chief Judge Nancy J. Rosenstengel on 10/7/2022. (anp)
|
|
Filing 7
NOTICE: Bennie K. Ellison was directed to file the attached form regarding consenting or declining to consent to magistrate judge jurisdiction. The time for doing so has now passed, and the Court has not received the form. As required by Administrative Order No. 257, Bennie K. Ellison shall return the form within 7 days or face possible sanctions. Consent due by 9/30/2022 (adh)THIS TEXT ENTRY IS AN ORDER OF THE COURT. NO FURTHER DOCUMENTATION WILL BE MAILED.
|
|
Filing 6
ORDER denying #2 Motion for Approval to Electronic File. Plaintiff's filing is merely a list of items he submitted to the Court. Although the first item on the list indicates request for approval to electronic file (Doc. 2, p. 1), Plaintiff has not submitted a formal motion seeking electronic access for this specific case. The granting of electronic access is specific to each case. See ECF User Manual, Rule 2 (Revised Aug. 2021) ("If the court permits, a party to a pending civil action who is not represented by an attorney (also known as a pro se party), may register as a Filing User"). Plaintiff shall file a motion seeking access to the Court's electronic filing system in this case within 14 days. If Plaintiff fails to timely file such a motion, his filings will be stricken, and the case will be administratively closed. Action due by 9/28/2022. Signed by Chief Judge Nancy J. Rosenstengel on 9/14/2022. (anp)THIS TEXT ENTRY IS AN ORDER OF THE COURT. NO FURTHER DOCUMENTATION WILL BE MAILED.
|
|
Filing 5
ORDER re #1 Complaint filed by Bennie K. Ellison. Plaintiff filed his Complaint pursuant to 42 U.S.C. 1983. He was not incarcerated at the time he filed his Complaint and has paid the full filing fee. The Complaint does not require a merits review pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 1915A. Plaintiff is responsible for effecting service on the named Defendants. Signed by Chief Judge Nancy J. Rosenstengel on 9/14/2022. (anp)THIS TEXT ENTRY IS AN ORDER OF THE COURT. NO FURTHER DOCUMENTATION WILL BE MAILED.
|
|
Filing 4
NOTICE AND ORDER: The Court has received your complaint and your filing fee. Your case number is 22-2037-NJR. The following is some information you should know regarding the initial stages of your lawsuit. The Court will now review your complaint to identify legally sufficient claims and defendants and dismiss any legally insufficient claims. See: 28 U.S.C. Sec. 1915(e)(2). 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. 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 Chief Judge Nancy J. Rosenstengel on 8/31/2022. (jaj)THIS TEXT ENTRY IS AN ORDER OF THE COURT. NO FURTHER DOCUMENTATION WILL BE MAILED.
|
|
Filing 3
NOTICE FROM CLERK Instructing Plaintiff to file Notice and Consent to Proceed Before A Magistrate Judge Jurisdiction Form: Pursuant to Administrative Order No. 257, within 21 days of this Notice, you must file the attached form indicating your consent to proceed before a Magistrate Judge or an affirmative declination to consent. Consent/Non-Consent to U.S. Magistrate Judge Jurisdiction form sent to Plaintiff on 8/31/2022. Consent due by 9/21/2022 (jaj)
|
|
Filing 2
MOTION for Approval to Electronic File by Bennie K. Ellison. (jaj)
|
|
Filing 1
COMPLAINT against All Defendants filed by Bennie K. Ellison.(jaj)
|
|
Filing fee paid: $ 402.00, receipt number 120 (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 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.
