RAY v. INDIANA et al
| BOBBY J. RAY |
| CPS and INDIANA |
| 1:2017cv04488 |
| December 4, 2017 |
| US District Court for the Southern District of Indiana |
| Indianapolis Office |
| Debra McVicker Lynch |
| Tanya Walton Pratt |
| Civil Rights: Other |
| 42 U.S.C. ยง 1983 Civil Rights Act |
| Plaintiff |
Follow case documents by RSS
Available Case Documents
The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing
4
ENTRY - 2 Motion for Leave to Proceed in forma pauperis is granted. Any claims against the State of Indiana and CPS are dismissed for failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted because the State (or a state agency) cannot be sue d in federal court due to Indiana's Eleventh Amendment immunity. For these reasons, the complaint is dismissed for lack of subject matter jurisdiction and failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted. The plaintiff shall have thr ough January 11, 2018, in which to show cause why this action should not be dismissed for lack of subject matter jurisdiction and failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted. Failure to respond to this order to show cause will result in the dismissal of the action for the reasons discussed in this Entry without further notice. See entry for details. Signed by Judge Tanya Walton Pratt on 12/12/2017. (Copy mailed to Plaintiff) (MEJ) Modified on 12/13/2017 to clarify (MEJ).
|
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.
