ROWE v. TAYLOR et al
| JEFFREY ALLEN ROWE |
| ASHLEY TAYLOR, ANDREW SICKMANN, MYRA STROBEL, CWM JONES, MISTY CECIL, THOMPSON and SCOTT FITCH |
| 1:2021cv02324 |
| August 25, 2021 |
| US District Court for the Southern District of Indiana |
| Sarah Evans Barker |
| Debra McVicker Lynch |
| Prisoner Petitions - Prison Condition |
| 42 U.S.C. ยง 1983 |
| Plaintiff |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on September 14, 2021. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing 5
ORDER - granting #2 Motion for Leave to Proceed in forma pauperis; The assessment of even an initial partial filing fee is waived because the plaintiff has no assets and no means by which to pay a partial filing fee. 28 U.S.C. 1915(b)(4). Accordingly, no initial partial filing fee is due at this time. Signed by Judge Sarah Evans Barker on 9/14/2021. Copy Mailed. (CKM)
|
| Filing 4 MAGISTRATE JUDGE's NOTICE of Availability to Exercise Jurisdiction issued. (AAS) |
|
Filing 3
Second Entry Screening Complaint and Directing Further Proceedings - Previously docketed in Case Number 1:20-cv-2664-RLY-TAB. SEE ORDER. Signed by Judge Richard L. Young on 8/25/2021.(AAS)
|
| Filing 2 MOTION for Leave to Proceed in forma pauperis, filed by Plaintiff JEFFREY ALLEN ROWE. (AAS) |
| Filing 1 COMPLAINT against All Defendants, filed by JEFFREY ALLEN ROWE. (No fee paid with this filing) (AAS) |
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.
