HAIRSTON v. MARION COUNTY SUPERIOR COURT #32 -- CLERK(S) OF THE MARION CIRCUIT COURT et al
| JOHN MANUEL HAIRSTON |
| MARION COUNTY SUPERIOR COURT #32 -- CLERK(S) OF THE MARION CIRCUIT COURT, INDIANA SUPREME COURT, DOXPOP, LLC, JANE ELIZABETH MAGNUS-STINSON, MARK DEAN STONER, ROBERT H. BEATSON, III, JEFFREY LYNN MARCHAL, INDIANA SUPREME COURT DISCIPLINARY COMMISSION, MARION COUNTY RECORDS MANAGEMENT, OFFICE OF THE INDIANA ATTORNEY GENERAL and OFFICE OF THE GOVERNOR |
| 1:2022cv00391 |
| February 24, 2022 |
| US District Court for the Southern District of Indiana |
| Doris L Pryor |
| James R Sweeney |
| Civil Rights: Other |
| 42 U.S.C. ยง 1983 Civil Rights Act |
| None |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on April 22, 2022. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing 6
Entry Screening Complaint - In summary, Hairston's Complaint, (Compl., ECF No. 1), is dismissed. The 1983 claims against Marion County Superior Court #32 - Clerk(s) of the Marion Circuit Court, the Indiana Supreme Court, Judge Magnus- Stinson, Judge Stoner, Magistrate Marchal, Prosecutor Beatson, and the Indiana Supreme Court Disciplinary Commission are dismissed with prejudice. The 1983 claims against Doxpop, Marion County Records Management, Attorney General Rokita, and Governor Holcomb are dismissed without prejudice. The state-law claims are also dismissed without prejudice. With respect to claims dismissed without prejudice, and only as to those claims and those Defendants, Hairston shall have until May 20, 2022, either to file an amended complaint that states a claim on which relief can be granted, or to show cause why judgment consistent with this Entry should not issue. Failure to do so by the deadline will result in dismissal of all claims with prejudice. Because the Complaint fails to allege viable claims, no summons shall issue at this time. If an amended complaint is filed and survives screening, then the Court will address service. ***SEE ORDER FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION*** (Copy to Plaintiff via U.S. mail) Signed by Judge James R. Sweeney II on 4/22/2022.(JDC)
|
| 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 to Plaintiff via U.S. mail) (JDC) |
| Filing 4 CONSENT to Jurisdiction to US Magistrate Judge by JOHN MANUEL HAIRSTON. (Attachments: #1 Envelope)(JDC) |
| Filing 3 MAGISTRATE JUDGE's NOTICE of Availability to Exercise Jurisdiction issued. (DJH) |
| Filing 2 NOTICE of Lawsuit & Request for Waiver of Service for Summons Supplied by JOHN MANUEL HAIRSTON. (Attachments: #1 Envelope) (DJH) |
| Filing 1 COMPLAINT against ROBERT H. BEATSON, III, DOXPOP, LLC, INDIANA SUPREME COURT, INDIANA SUPREME COURT DISCIPLINARY COMMISSION, JANE ELIZABETH MAGNUS-STINSON, JEFFREY LYNN MARCHAL, MARION COUNTY RECORDS MANAGEMENT, MARION COUNTY SUPERIOR COURT #32 -- CLERK(S) OF THE MARION CIRCUIT COURT, OFFICE OF THE GOVERNOR, OFFICE OF THE INDIANA ATTORNEY GENERAL, MARK DEAN STONER, filed by JOHN MANUEL HAIRSTON. (Filing fee $402, receipt number IP078025) (Attachments: #1 Exhibits including court records, Indiana Offender Database Search, MyCase Results and Summary reports, letters, DoxPop Case Details, Request for Investigation to the Indiana Supreme Court Disciplinary Commission, letters from Indiana Supreme Court Disciplinary Commission, and Request for Court Records to Marion County Records Management, #2 Civil Cover Sheet, #3 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.
