KADROVACH v. WEXFORD OF INDIANA, LLC et al
| ROBERT KADROVACH |
| WEXFORD OF INDIANA, LLC and M. MITCHEFF |
| 1:2021cv01076 |
| April 28, 2021 |
| US District Court for the Southern District of Indiana |
| Tim A Baker |
| Tanya Walton Pratt |
| Prisoner Petitions - Prison Condition |
| 42 U.S.C. ยง 1983 |
| Plaintiff |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on November 18, 2021. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing 11
Documents to be Sent via Electronic Notice - re #1 Complaint, #10 NOTICE of Lawsuit & Waiver Issued by Clerk, #9 Entry Electronic Notice to Wexford. (AKH)
|
|
Filing 10
NOTICE of Lawsuit & Waiver Issued by Clerk upon: Dr. M. Mitcheff (AKH)
|
|
Filing 9
Order Screening Complaint and Directing Further Proceedings. Plaintiff Robert Kadrovach, an inmate at Plainfield Correctional Facility ("PCF"), filed this lawsuit alleging that his medications have been taken from him. Mr. Kadrovach has paid the filing fee. Because he is a "prisoner" this Court has an obligation to screen his complaint before service on the defendants. The clerk shall terminate Wexford as a defendant on the docket. The clerk is directed to issue process to Dr. Mitcheff in the manner specified by Rule 4 (d). Process shall consist of the complaint (dkt. #1 pages 1-5), applicable forms (Notice of Lawsuit and Request for Wavier of Service of Summons and Waiver of Service of Summons), and this Order. Dr.Mitcheff is identified as an employee of Wexford. A copy of this Order and the process documents shall also be served on Wexford electronically. Wexford is ORDERED to provide the full name and last known home address of any defendant who does not waive service if they have such information. This information may be provided to the Court informally or may be filed ex parte. Copies sent pursuant to distribution list. Signed by Judge Tanya Walton Pratt on 6/14/2021. (AKH)
|
|
Filing 8
Order - The plaintiff has paid the $402.00 filing fee for this action. Accordingly, his motion to proceed in forma pauperis, dkt. #2 , is denied as moot. (Copy to Plaintiff via U.S. mail) Signed by Judge Tanya Walton Pratt on 6/10/2021. (JDC)
|
|
Filing 7
RECEIPT #IP074357 for filing fee in the amount of $402.00, paid by ROBERT KADROVACH. (DJH)
|
|
Filing 6
NOTICE OF DEFICIENCY - Your civil rights complaint has been received. You shall have through June 10, 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 5
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 4
MAGISTRATE JUDGE's NOTICE of Availability to Exercise Jurisdiction issued. (DJH)
|
|
Filing 3
NOTICE of Appearance by Plaintiff, ROBERT KADROVACH. (Attachments: #1 Envelope) (DJH)
|
|
Filing 2
MOTION for Leave to Proceed in forma pauperis filed by Plaintiff, ROBERT KADROVACH. (Attachments: #1 Envelope)(DJH)
|
|
Filing 1
COMPLAINT against M. MITCHEFF, and WEXFORD OF INDIANA, LLC, filed by ROBERT KADROVACH. (No fee paid with this filing) (Attachments: #1 Proposed Complaint, #2 Notice of Tort Claim, #3 Proposed Summons, #4 Envelope)(DJH)
|
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.
