Falls v. Marshall County Sheriffs Dept et al
| Martin D Falls |
| Marshall County Sheriffs Dept, Beau Holcomb and Matthew Hassel |
| 3:2019cv01118 |
| November 27, 2019 |
| US District Court for the Northern District of Indiana |
| Michael G Gotsch |
| Damon R Leichty |
| Prisoner: Civil Rights |
| 42 U.S.C. ยง 1983 |
| None |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on January 10, 2020. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| ***Deadlines: Waiver of service deadline terminated. (shk) |
| Filing 8 WAIVER OF SERVICE Returned Executed by Beau Holcomb, Matthew Hassel, Marshall County Sheriffs Dept. All Defendants. (Baron, Lisa) |
| Filing 7 NOTICE of Appearance by Elizabeth A Knight on behalf of All Defendants (Knight, Elizabeth) |
| Filing 6 NOTICE of Appearance by Lisa A Baron on behalf of Matthew Hassel, Beau Holcomb, Marshall County Sheriffs Dept (Baron, Lisa) |
| Filing 5 NOTICE of a Lawsuit and Request to Waive Service of Summons sent to Sheriff Hassel, Sergeant Holcomb, Marshall County Sheriff's Department. (Copy mailed as directed in Order) Waiver of Service due by 1/22/2020. (Attachments: #1 Opinion and Order, #2 Complaint) (lhc) |
Filing 4
OPINION AND ORDER: The Court GRANTS Martin D. Falls leave to proceed on a Fourteenth Amendment claim against Sheriff Hassel and Sergeant Holcomb for money damages for allegedly subjecting him to overcrowded conditions since July 2019; GRANTS him leave to proceed on a Fourteenth Amendment claim against the Marshall County Sheriff's Department for money damages for allegedly maintaining a policy or practicing of overcrowding at the Marshall County Jail; DISMISSES all other claims; DIRECTS the clerk and the USMS to issue and serve process on Sheriff Hassel, Sergeant Holcomb, and the Marshall County's Sheriff's Department at the Marshall County Jail with a copy of this order and the complaint #1 as required by 28 U.S.C. 1915(d); and ORDERS, pursuant to 42 U.S.C. 1997e(g)(2), Sheriff Hassel, Sergeant Holcomb, and the Marshall County's Sheriff's Department to respond, as provided for in the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and N.D. Ind. L.R. 10-1(b), only to the claims for which Martin D. Falls has been granted leave to proceed in this screening order. Signed by Judge Damon R Leichty on 12/20/2019. (Copy mailed as directed in Order) (lhc)
|
|
Filing 3
ORDER GRANTS #2 Motion for Leave to Proceed in forma pauperis; WAIVES the initial partial filing fee; ORDERS the plaintiff, Martin D. Falls, Marshall County Jail # 4677, I.D.O.C. # 144173, to pay (and the facility having custody of him to automatically remit) to the clerk of this court 20% of the money he receives for each calendar month during which he receives $10.00 or more, until the $350.00 filing fee is paid in full; DIRECTS the clerk to create a ledger for receipt of these funds; and DIRECTS the clerk to send a copy of this order to each facility where the plaintiff is housed until the filing fee has been paid in full. Signed by Judge Damon R Leichty on 12/20/2019. (Copy mailed as directed in Order) (lhc)
|
| Filing 2 MOTION for Leave to Proceed in forma pauperis by Plaintiff Martin D Falls. (nae) |
| Filing 1 PRO SE COMPLAINT against Matthew Hassel, Beau Holcomb, Marshall County Sheriffs Dept, filed by Martin D Falls. (Returned file stamped copy with case number to Falls) (Attachments: #1 Envelope)(nae) |
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 Indiana 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.
