HAMPTON v. KNIGHT et al
EDWARD M. HAMPTON |
AARON COX and WENDY KNIGHT |
1:2016cv00202 |
January 25, 2016 |
US District Court for the Southern District of Indiana |
Indianapolis Office |
Denise K. LaRue |
Tanya Walton Pratt |
Prisoner: Civil Rights |
28 U.S.C. ยง 1983 Civil Rights |
Plaintiff |
Available Case Documents
The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:
Document Text |
---|
Filing 32 Entry Denying Motion to Revoke In Forma Pauperis Status - Accordingly, the ruling granting Hampton permission to proceed in forma pauperis was appropriate and the motion to revoke in forma pauperis status [dkt 29] is DENIED. **See Order** Copy to Plaintiff via U.S. Mail. Signed by Judge Tanya Walton Pratt on 8/2/2016. (JLS) |
Filing 16 Entry Discussing Complaint and Directing Further Proceedings - Based on the foregoing screening, the plaintiff's First Amendment claims shall proceed. Any Eighth Amendment claim alleged by the plaintiff based on the same facts is dismissed. S ee Conyers v. Abitz, 416 F.3d 580, 586 (7th Cir. 2005) ("Constitutional claims are to be addressed under the most applicable provision."). The clerk is designated pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 4(c)(3) to issue process to the defendants in the manner specified by Rule 4(d). Process shall consist of the complaint, applicable forms (Notice of Lawsuit and Request for Waiver of Service of Summons and Waiver of Service of Summons), and this Entry. Copies to Petitioner and Respondent via U.S. Mail. Signed by Judge Tanya Walton Pratt on 4/14/2016. (JLS) |
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 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.