NESBITT v. CITY OF INDIANAPOLIS et al
| SIR NIKOLAAS Q. NESBITT |
| CITY OF INDIANAPOLIS, RICHARD LAUISH, K. WHEAT and KASPER |
| 1:2023cv02158 |
| November 30, 2023 |
| US District Court for the Southern District of Indiana |
| Tim A Baker |
| James R Sweeney |
| Civil Rights: Other |
| 42 U.S.C. ยง 1983 Civil Rights Act |
| Plaintiff |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on January 3, 2024. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Filing 13 Second AMENDED COMPLAINT against CITY OF INDIANAPOLIS, KASPER, RICHARD LAUISH, K. WHEAT, filed by SIR NIKOLAAS Q. NESBITT.(JRB) |
| Filing 12 MOTION for Leave to Proceed in forma pauperis, filed by Plaintiff SIR NIKOLAAS Q. NESBITT. (Attachments: #1 Exhibit)(JRB) |
| Filing 11 CORRECTED AMENDED COMPLAINT against All Defendants, filed by SIR NIKOLAAS Q. NESBITT.(LF) |
| Filing 10 AMENDED COMPLAINT against All Defendants, filed by SIR NIKOLAAS Q. NESBITT.(LF) |
| Filing 8 NOTICE TO PLAINTIFF REGARDING SERVICE OF SUMMONS AND COMPLAINT - The Court is providing you, the Plaintiff, important information about notifying the Defendants that your lawsuit has been filed. Please read it carefully. (See Notice.) Copy to Plaintiff via US mail. (JSR) |
| Filing 9 CONSENT to Jurisdiction to US Magistrate Judge, filed by SIR NIKOLAAS Q. NESBITT. (SWM) |
Filing 7
Order Denying IFP, Denying Motion for Assistance with Recruiting Counsel, and Screening Complaint - Plaintiff's Motion for Leave to Proceed In Forma Pauperis (ECF No. #2 ), is denied without prejudice and the clerk is directed to include a copy of the appropriate IFP form with Plaintiff's copy of this Order. Plaintiff's Motion for Assistance with Recruiting Counsel, (ECF No. #3 ), is denied without prejudice and the clerk is directed to include a copy of the Court's form Motion for Assistance with Recruiting Counsel with Plaintiff's copy of this Order. This action will proceed on the following claims: unreasonable search and seizure under the Fourth Amendment; false imprisonment; false arrest; and battery under state law. These are the only claims the Court has identified in the Complaint. Nesbitt should note that his ability to proceed on these claims has no bearing on their likelihood of surviving a Rule 12(b)(6) motion to dismiss, should Defendant file one. If Nesbitt believes he has asserted other claims, he must notify the Court no later than January 5, 2024. The clerk is directed to terminate the City of Indianapolis, K. Wheat, and Kasper as defendants on the docket. SEE ORDER. Copy to Plaintiff via US Mail. Signed by Judge James R. Sweeney II on 12/12/2023. (Attachments: #1 Form Motion for Assistance Recruiting Counsel) (AAS)
|
| 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 mailed to Plaintiff.) (LBT) |
| Filing 5 Notice to File Rule 7.1 Disclosure Statement. (RAGS) (CCG) |
| Filing 4 MAGISTRATE JUDGE's NOTICE of Availability to Exercise Jurisdiction issued. (CCG) |
| Filing 3 MOTION to Appoint Counsel, filed by Plaintiff NIKOLAAS Q. NESBITT. (CCG) |
| Filing 2 MOTION for Leave to Proceed in forma pauperis, filed by Plaintiff NIKOLAAS Q. NESBITT. (CCG) |
| Filing 1 COMPLAINT against CITY OF INDIANAPOLIS, KASPER, RICHARD LAUISH, K. WHEAT, filed by NIKOLAAS Q. NESBITT. (No fee paid with this filing) (CCG) (Main Document 1 replaced on 12/1/2023) (CCG). |
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.
