LAX v. WARDEN OF THE CORRECTIONAL INDUSTRIAL FACILITY
| MARK LAX |
| WARDEN OF THE CORRECTIONAL INDUSTRIAL FACILITY |
| 1:2018cv03078 |
| October 4, 2018 |
| US District Court for the Southern District of Indiana |
| Mark J Dinsmore |
| Tanya Walton Pratt |
| Habeas Corpus (General) |
| 28 U.S.C. ยง 2254 |
| None |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on October 10, 2019. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Filing 7 RECEIPT #IP062998 for Writ of Habeas Corpus fee in the amount of $5.00, paid by Petitioner. (HET) |
Filing 6
ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE - Discipline Case - Mark Lax's amended petition for a writ of habeas corpus challenges his disciplinary conviction in disciplinary case number CIC 18-04-0445. The custodian of petitioner is directed to answer the allegations of the petition for a writ of habeas corpus and in doing so shall show cause why the relief sought by the petitioner should not be granted. Show Cause Response due by 1/2/2019. (See Order.) Copy to Petitioner via US Mail. Signed by Judge Tanya Walton Pratt on 11/21/2018.(NAD)
|
| Filing 5 AMENDED PETITION against WARDEN OF THE CORRECTIONAL INDUSTRIAL FACILITY, filed by MARK LAX. (Attachments: #1 Exhibit Report of Conduct)(NAD) Modified to reflect petition and not complaint on 11/20/2018 (JRT). |
|
Filing 4
ORDER - DIRECTING FURTHER PROCEEDINGS; The petitioner shall have through November 13, 2018, in which to either pay the $5.00 filing fee for this action or demonstrate that he lacks the financial ability to do so. If he seeks leave to proceed in forma pauperis, his request must be accompanied by a copy of the transactions associated with his institution trust account for the six-month period preceding the filing of this action on October 4, 2018. The clerk is directed to include a form motion or leave to proceed in forma pauperis with the petitioner's copy of this Order. The petitioner shall have through November 13, 2018, to file an amended petition that addresses only the prison disciplinary proceeding being challenged in this action (CIC 18-04-0445). The clerk is directed to include a form petition with the petitioner's copy of this Order. Signed by Judge Tanya Walton Pratt on 10/15/2018. Copies Mailed. (CKM)
|
| Filing 3 MAGISTRATE JUDGE's NOTICE of Availability to Exercise Jurisdiction issued. (HET) |
| Filing 2 PETITION for Writ of Habeas Corpus, filed by MARK LAX. (No fee paid with this filing) (HET) |
| Filing 1 ENTRY DIRECTING FURTHER PROCEEDINGS. Signed by Judge Jane Magnus-Stinson on 10/4/2018.(HET) (Main Document 1 replaced on 10/4/2018) (HET). |
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 Party Aliases
- Associated Cases
- Attorneys
- Case File Location
- Case Summary
- Docket Report
- History/Documents
- Parties
- Related Transactions
- Check Status
| Search for this case: LAX v. WARDEN OF THE CORRECTIONAL INDUSTRIAL FACILITY | |
|---|---|
| Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
| Search Web | [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ] |
| Petitioner: MARK LAX | |
| 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 ] |
| Respondent: WARDEN OF THE CORRECTIONAL INDUSTRIAL FACILITY | |
| 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.
