Williams v. Lott et al
| Edward Williams |
| A Lott, Jamie Eguia, Carlos Espinoza, LaPorte County Jail, Al Ott, Allen Ott and Jeffrey Holt |
| 3:2022cv00788 |
| September 20, 2022 |
| US District Court for the Northern District of Indiana |
| Jon E DeGuilio |
| Michael G Gotsch |
| Prisoner: Civil Rights |
| 42 U.S.C. ยง 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights |
| None |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on November 7, 2022. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing 8
OPINION AND ORDER: The court DENIES the motion for temporary restraining order #7 ; GRANTS Edward Williams until 12/9/2022, to file an amended complaint; and CAUTIONS Edward Williams if he does not respond by the deadline, this case will be dismissed under 28 U.S.C. 1915A without further notice because the current complaint does not state a claim for which relief can be granted. Signed by Chief Judge Jon E DeGuilio on 11/7/22. (Copy mailed to pro se party). (nhc)
|
|
Filing 7
MOTION for Temporary Restraining Order by Plaintiff Edward Williams. (nae)
|
|
Filing 6
AMENDED COMPLAINT against Carlos Espinoza, Allen Ott, Jeffrey Holt, filed by Edward Williams. (Attachments: #1 Exhibits, #2 Envelope)(nae)
|
|
Filing 5
OPINION AND ORDER DENYING #4 Letter/Request for temporary restraining order by Edward Williams. DIRECTING the clerk to put this case number on a blank Prisoner Complaint Pro Se 14 (INND Rev. 2/20) form and send it to Edward Williams along with a blank Prisoner Complaint Pro Se 14 (INND Rev. 2/20) form. GRANTING Edward Williams until 11/18/2022, to file an amended complaint containing only related claims on the form with this case number sent to him by the clerk and CAUTIONING Edward Williams that, if he does not respond by the deadline or if he files an amended complaint with unrelated claims, the court will select one group of related claims and dismiss the others without prejudice. Signed by Chief Judge Jon E DeGuilio on 10/18/2022. (Copy mailed to pro se party with form as directed in order)(mrm)
|
|
Filing 4
Letter from Edward Williams re discovery, typo on docket, and request for Temporary Restraining Order and Injunction. (Attachments: #1 Exhibit, #2 Envelope) (kmt)
|
|
Filing 3
ORDER: The court GRANTS the plaintiff leave to proceed in forma pauperis #2 ; ORDERS the plaintiff, Edward Williams, IDOC # 137211, BOP # 13512-027, LaPorte County Jail # 20142287, to immediately pay (and the facility having custody to automatically remit) $166.53 to the clerk in payment of the initial partial filing fee; ORDERS the plaintiff to pay (and the facility having custody to automatically remit) to the clerk 20% of the money received for each calendar month during which $10.00 or more is received, 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 Chief Judge Jon E DeGuilio on 09/21/2022. (Copy mailed to pro se party and LaPorte County Jail: Inmate Trust Fund)(sej)
|
|
Filing 2
MOTION for Leave to Proceed in forma pauperis (Prisoner Trust Account Ledger attached) by Plaintiff Edward Williams. (kmt)
|
|
Filing 1
PRO SE COMPLAINT against Jamie Eguia, Carlos Espinoza, LaPorte County Jail, A Lott, filed by Edward Williams. (Attachments: #1 Envelope)(File stamped copy with case number sent to Williams)(kmt)
|
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.
