HERZ v. UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF INDIANA et al
| CAROLYN WENDY HERZ |
| DONALD HARRIS, MARC ROTHENBERG, VERIZON WIRELESS, MCI COMMUNICATIONS SERVICES LLC, ROBERT E. LEE DAVIES, UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF INDIANA, SEAN PERSIN, DENNIS SASSO, ERIC HOLCOMB, LESLIE PAGE, JONATHAN ADLAND, EVAN GOODMAN, THEODORE ROKITA, MARION SUPERIOR COURT, SANDY SASSO, DAVID "RANDY&quo KENNEDY and DAVID RANDY KENNEDY |
| 1:2021cv00618 |
| March 15, 2021 |
| US District Court for the Southern District of Indiana |
| Debra McVicker Lynch |
| Jane Magnus-Stinson |
| Tanya Walton Pratt |
| P.I.: Other |
| 28 U.S.C. ยง 1442 |
| None |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on March 25, 2021. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Filing 9 NOTICE of Appearance by Eric Antonio Pagnamenta on behalf of Defendants EVAN GOODMAN, ERIC HOLCOMB, MARION SUPERIOR COURT, SEAN PERSIN, THEODORE ROKITA, MARC ROTHENBERG. (Pagnamenta, Eric) |
| Filing 8 NOTICE of Appearance by Alexander Robert Carlisle on behalf of Defendants EVAN GOODMAN, ERIC HOLCOMB, MARION SUPERIOR COURT, MARC ROTHENBERG. (Carlisle, Alexander) |
| Filing 7 NOTICE of Appearance by Alexander Robert Carlisle on behalf of Defendants SEAN PERSIN, THEODORE ROKITA. (Carlisle, Alexander) |
Filing 6
ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE AND STAY PROCEEDINGS. Until Plaintiff has satisfied her obligations both before the Seventh Circuit and before this Court, it is not possible for her to litigate her claims. IT IS ORDERED that Plaintiff has through April 8, 2021 to SHOW CAUSE why this action should not be dismissed because restrictions have been imposed on her ability to file papers in federal courts. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that, other than a response to this show cause order, Plaintiff is prohibited from delivering any documents to the Clerk for filing, and must not attempt to present materials or information to the Court in an indirect fashion, such as by sending a fax or an email to the Court or its personnel except as explicitly provide by General Orders of this Court. To do so would be a violation of the orders of the Court of Appeals and of this Court. Any and all proceedings in this matter are STAYED until the Court acts, either upon Plaintiff's response to this order, or upon Plaintiff's failure to respond if no response is made. Copy to Plaintiff via U.S. Mail. Signed by Judge Jane Magnus-Stinson on 3/17/2021.(MAC)
|
| Filing 5 NOTICE of Reassignment of Case to Judge Jane Magnus-Stinson. Judge Tanya Walton Pratt is no longer assigned to this case. Please include the new case number, 1:21-cv-00618-JMS-DML, on all future filings in this matter. (REO) |
|
Filing 4
ORDER OF RECUSAL. Clerk is directed to randomly reassign case and notify parties of newly assigned Judge. Signed by Judge Tanya Walton Pratt on 3/16/2021.(NAD) Modified on 3/17/2021 - Copy to Plaintiff via US Mail (NAD).
|
| Filing 3 MAGISTRATE JUDGE's NOTICE of Availability to Exercise Jurisdiction issued. (AKH) |
| Filing 2 NOTICE of Appearance by Shelese M. Woods on behalf of Defendant UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF INDIANA. (Woods, Shelese) |
| Filing 1 NOTICE OF REMOVAL from Marion Circuit/Superior Court, case number 49D04-2102-CT-007211, filed by UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF INDIANA. (No fee paid with this filing) (Attachments: #1 Civil Cover Sheet, #2 State Court Record Complaint, #3 State Court Record Complaint, Summoms, Appearance)(Woods, Shelese) |
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.
