BROWN v. PRETORIOUS et al
| RUSSELL S. BROWN |
| PLUMMER, SARA, PRETORIOUS, STACI and MORGAN |
| 1:2020cv03145 |
| December 7, 2020 |
| US District Court for the Southern District of Indiana |
| Matthew P Brookman |
| Jane Magnus-Stinson |
| Prisoner Petitions - Prison Condition |
| 42 U.S.C. ยง 1983 |
| Plaintiff |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on January 27, 2021. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing 11
ORDER granting Plaintiff's #2 Motion for Leave to Proceed in forma pauperis to the extent that the plaintiff is assessed an initial partial filing fee of Eleven Dollars and Seventy Cents ($11.70). See 28 U.S.C. 1915(b)(1). The plaintiff shall have through February 26, 2021, in which to pay this sum to the clerk of the district court. The plaintiff is informed that after the initial partial filing fee is paid, he will be obligated to make monthly payments of 20 percent of the preceding month's income each month that the amount in his account exceeds $10.00, until the full filing fee of $350.00 is paid. 28 U.S.C. 1915(b)(2). After the initial partial filing fee is received, a collection order will be issued to the plaintiff and the plaintiff's custodian, and the Court will screen the complaint in accordance with 28 U.S.C. 1915A. Copy to Plaintiff via U.S. Mail cc: Finance Office. Signed by Judge Jane Magnus-Stinson on 1/27/2021. (MAC)
|
| Filing 10 RESPONSE, re #5 Notice of Deficiency, filed by Plaintiff RUSSELL S. BROWN. (Attachments: #1 Trust Account Information, #2 Envelope). (MAC) |
|
Filing 9
ORDER - The plaintiff's motion for extension of time, dkt. [ #8 ], is granted. The plaintiff shall have through February 9, 2021, in which to submit a copy of the transaction history associated with his institution trust account for the 6-month period preceding the filing of this action. Copy to Plaintiff via US Mail. Signed by Magistrate Judge Tim A. Baker on 1/11/2021. (SWM)
|
| Filing 8 MOTION for Extension of Time to in which to Comply with #5 Notice of Deficiency, filed by Plaintiff RUSSELL S. BROWN. (Attachments: #1 Envelope). (MAC) |
| Filing 7 CONSENT to Jurisdiction to US Magistrate Judge by RUSSELL S. BROWN. (Attachments: #1 Envelope). (MAC) |
| Filing 6 NOTICE to Pro se Litigant - The following information is provided to pro se litigants to inform them about rules and procedures governing how they communicate with the Court. Copy distributed to Plaintiff via US mail. (TMC) |
| Filing 5 NOTICE OF DEFICIENCY - Your civil rights complaint has been received. You shall have through January 8, 2021, in which to correct the deficiencies as follows: Your motion to proceed in forma pauperis cannot be ruled on because you have not submitted a copy of the transaction history associated with your institution trust account for the 6-month period preceding the filing of this action. (Copy sent to plaintiff via US Mail). (JRT) |
| Filing 4 MAGISTRATE JUDGE's NOTICE of Availability to Exercise Jurisdiction issued. (AKH) |
| Filing 3 MOTION for Appointment of Counsel, filed by Plaintiff RUSSELL S. BROWN. (Attachments: #1 Envelope).(AKH) |
| Filing 2 MOTION for Leave to Proceed in forma pauperis, filed by Plaintiff RUSSELL S. BROWN. (Attachments: #1 Envelope). (AKH) |
| Filing 1 COMPLAINT against MORGAN, PLUMMER, PRETORIOUS, SARA, STACI, filed by RUSSELL S. BROWN. (No fee paid with this filing) (Attachments: #1 Proposed Summons, #2 Envelope). (AKH) |
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.
