MCCARTHY v. CITY OF GREENWOOD, INDIANA et al
| JAMESON MCCARTHY |
| INDIANA POLITICAL SUBDIVISION, INDIANAPOLIS METROPOLITAN POLICE, CITY OF INDPLS and CITY OF GREENWOOD, INDIANA |
| 1:2019cv02501 |
| June 21, 2019 |
| US District Court for the Southern District of Indiana |
| James Patrick Hanlon |
| Debra McVicker Lynch |
| Civil Rights: Other |
| 42 U.S.C. ยง 1983 |
| None |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on November 18, 2019. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing 8
ORDER ON MOTION TO PROCEED IN FORMA PAUPERIS - Mr. McCarthy's motion to proceed in forma pauperis, dkt. #6 , is GRANTED to the extent that he is assessed an initial partial filing fee of $1.45. See 28 U.S.C. 1915(b)(1). He shall have through September 16, 2019, to pay this initial partial filing fee to the clerk of the district court. While Mr. McCarthy is excused from prepaying the full filing fee, he still must pay the $350.00 filing fee under the statutory formula set forth in 28 U.S.C. 1915(b)(2). See 28 U.S.C. 1915(b)(1) ("[T]he prisoner shall be required to pay the full amount of a filing fee."). Copy to Jameson McCarthy via U.S. mail. Signed by Judge James Patrick Hanlon on 8/19/2019. (JDH)
|
| Filing 7 CONSENT to Jurisdiction to US Magistrate Judge by JAMESON MCCARTHY. (Attachments: #1 Envelope)(DWH) |
| Filing 6 MOTION (Letter) for Leave to Proceed in forma pauperis, filed by Plaintiff JAMESON MCCARTHY. (Attachments: #1 Exhibit - Offender Transaction History, #2 Envelope)(DWH) |
|
Filing 5
ORDER ON FILING FEE AND IN FORMA PAUPERIS STATUS - On June 24, 2019, the Court denied Plaintiff's motion to proceed in forma pauperis because he failed to attach a copy of the transactions associated with his institution trust account for the 6-month period preceding the filing of his action. Dkt. 4. Plaintiff had until July 16, 2019, to renew his motion by providing this information; otherwise he would be required to pay the $400 filing fee required by 28 U.S.C. 1915(a)(2). Plaintiff has not filed a renewed motion proceed in forma pauperis by July 16. Therefore, Plaintiff has through August 16, 2019, to pay the $400 filing fee. Failure to do so by this date will result in the dismissal of this action without further warning. Signed by Judge James Patrick Hanlon on 7/17/2019. Copy to Plaintiff via US Mail. (DWH)
|
| Filing 4 ENTRY DIRECTING FURTHER PROCEEDINGS - The plaintiff's motion to proceed in forma pauperis, dkt. 2, is denied as presented. He shall have until July 16, 2019, in which renew his motion to proceed in forma pauperis by attaching a copy of the transactions associated with his institution trust account for the 6-month period preceding the filing of this action on June 21, 2019. See 42 U.S.C. 1915(a)(2). Otherwise, the plaintiff must pay the $400.00 filing fee. Copies to Jameson McCarthy via U.S. mail. Signed by Judge James Patrick Hanlon on 6/24/2019. (JDH) |
| Filing 3 MAGISTRATE JUDGE's NOTICE of Availability to Exercise Jurisdiction issued. (REO) |
| Filing 2 MOTION for Leave to Proceed in forma pauperis, filed by Plaintiff JAMESON MCCARTHY. (Attachments: #1 Envelope)(REO) |
| Filing 1 COMPLAINT against CITY OF GREENWOOD, INDIANA, CITY OF INDPLS, INDIANA POLITICAL SUBDIVISION, INDIANAPOLIS METROPOLITAN POLICE, filed by JAMESON MCCARTHY. (No fee paid with this filing) (Attachments: #1 Exhibit, #2 Envelope)(REO) |
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
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.
