GLENN v. LIEBEL et al
| DOLEN GLENN |
| D. WALKER and DAVID LIEBEL |
| WVCF (Court Use Only) |
| 2:2014cv00343 |
| October 31, 2014 |
| US District Court for the Southern District of Indiana |
| Terre Haute Office |
| Mark J. Dinsmore |
| Jane Magnus-Stinson |
| Prisoner Petitions - Prison Condition |
| 42 U.S.C. ยง 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights |
| Plaintiff |
Follow case documents by RSS
Available Case Documents
The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing
8
ENTRY Discussing Complaint and Directing Further Proceedings - The plaintiff's 3 motion to proceed in forma pauperis is granted. No assessment of a partial initial filing fee is feasible at this time.The plaintiff's 4 motion to appoint counsel is denied as premature.The plaintiff's 7 request is denied for the present. The Court cannot perform research on behalf of litigants. The First Amendment and RLUIPA claims shall proceed against defendants Liebel and Walker. Any clai ms brought under the Eighth and Fourteenth Amendments and the Indiana Constitution are dismissed because such claims fail to state a claim upon which relief can be granted. The clerk shall issue and serve process on defendants David Liebel and Rev. D. Walker in the manner specified by Fed. R. Civ. P. 4(d)(2). Process in this case shall consist of the complaint filed on October 31, 2014, applicable forms, and this Entry. **SEE ENTRY** Signed by Judge Jane Magnus-Stinson on 11/10/2014. (AH)
|
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.
