JOHNSON v. DENNICK
Plaintiff: CHRISTOPHER MICHAEL JOHNSON
Defendant: DENNICK
Case Number: 1:2019cv00010
Filed: January 2, 2019
Court: US District Court for the Southern District of Indiana
Presiding Judge: Mark J Dinsmore
Referring Judge: Jane Magnus-Stinson
Nature of Suit: Prisoner Petitions - Prison Condition
Cause of Action: 42 U.S.C. ยง 1983
Jury Demanded By: None
Docket Report

This docket was last retrieved on September 28, 2020. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.

Date Filed Document Text
January 2, 2019 Filing 2 MOTION for Leave to Proceed in forma pauperis, filed by Plaintiff CHRISTOPHER MICHAEL JOHNSON. (Attachments: #1 Envelope)(HET)
January 2, 2019 Filing 1 COMPLAINT against DENNICK, filed by CHRISTOPHER MICHAEL JOHNSON. (No fee paid with this filing) (Attachments: #1 Envelope)(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 this case: JOHNSON v. DENNICK
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Plaintiff: CHRISTOPHER MICHAEL JOHNSON
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: DENNICK
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?