JACKSON v. ROGERS et al

JACKSON v. ROGERS et al

Plaintiff:	ROBERT JACKSON
Defendant:	KEITH HALL and RICHARD ROGER ROGERS, JR.
Case Number:	1:2015cv01309
Filed:	August 18, 2015
Court:	US District Court for the Southern District of Indiana
Office:	Indianapolis Office
Presiding Judge:	Denise K. LaRue
Presiding Judge:	Tanya Walton Pratt
Nature of Suit:	Personal Inj. Med. Malpractice
Cause of Action:	28 U.S.C. § 1331 Fed. Question: Medical Malpractice
Jury Demanded By:	Plaintiff

Follow case documents by RSS

Available Case Documents

The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:

Date Filed	Document Text
September 15, 2015	Filing 9 ORDER denying Plaintiff's 8 Motion to Appoint Counsel. The plaintiff continues to have through September 21, 2015, in which show cause why this action should not be dismissed for lack of jurisdiction. Copy to Mail via U.S. Mail. Signed by Judge Tanya Walton Pratt on 9/15/2015. (MAC)
August 21, 2015	Filing 6 ENTRY Dismissing Complaint and Directing Further Proceedings; ORDER granting Plaintiff's 2 Motion for Leave to Proceed in forma pauperis. The complaint is dismissed for lack of jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B). At thi s time, the dismissal of the complaint will not lead to dismissal of the action. Instead, Mr. Jackson shall have through September 21, 2015, in which show cause why this action should not be dismissed for lack of jurisdiction (See Entry). Copy to Plaintiff via U.S. Mail. Signed by Judge Tanya Walton Pratt on 8/21/2015. (MAC)

Date Filed

Document Text

September 15, 2015

Filing 9 ORDER denying Plaintiff's 8 Motion to Appoint Counsel. The plaintiff continues to have through September 21, 2015, in which show cause why this action should not be dismissed for lack of jurisdiction. Copy to Mail via U.S. Mail. Signed by Judge Tanya Walton Pratt on 9/15/2015. (MAC)

August 21, 2015

Filing 6 ENTRY Dismissing Complaint and Directing Further Proceedings; ORDER granting Plaintiff's 2 Motion for Leave to Proceed in forma pauperis. The complaint is dismissed for lack of jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B). At thi s time, the dismissal of the complaint will not lead to dismissal of the action. Instead, Mr. Jackson shall have through September 21, 2015, in which show cause why this action should not be dismissed for lack of jurisdiction (See Entry). Copy to Plaintiff via U.S. Mail. Signed by Judge Tanya Walton Pratt on 8/21/2015. (MAC)

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

Search for this case: JACKSON v. ROGERS 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: KEITH HALL
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: RICHARD ROGER ROGERS, JR.
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: ROBERT JACKSON
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?