PERKINS v. ARAMARK et al
COREY PERKINS |
T. BOCH, ARAMARK, D. BEDWELL, J. SCHILLING, SHELDON, B. SMITH, C. ORNDORFF and WALLACE |
2:2019cv00265 |
June 7, 2019 |
US District Court for the Southern District of Indiana |
James Patrick Hanlon |
Doris L Pryor |
Prisoner Petitions - Prison Condition |
42 U.S.C. ยง 1983 |
None |
Docket Report
This docket was last retrieved on December 1, 2020. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
Document Text |
---|
Filing 9 Documents for Service by IDOC - re #8 NOTICE of Lawsuit & Waiver Issued by Clerk, #2 Complaint, #7 Entry. (DMW) |
Filing 8 NOTICE of Lawsuit & Waiver Issued by Clerk to: 1) Aramark Food Services; 2) Sheldon; 3) T. Boch; 4) D. Bedwell; 5) C. Orndorff;6) B. Smith; 7) Wallace; 8) J. Schilling (DMW) |
Filing 7 ENTRY SCREENING COMPLAINT AND DIRECTING FURTHER PROCEEDINGS - The complaint alleges an Eighth Amendment claim against the individual defendants based on their deliberate indifference to the rat infestation in the prison dining areas and an Eighth Amendment policy or practice claim against Aramark. These claims for money damages shall proceed. If the plaintiff believes that additional claims were alleged in the complaint, but not identified by the Court, he shall have through August 20, 2019, in which to identify those claims. The clerk is directed pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 4(c)(3) to issue process to defendants Sheldon, T. Boch, D. Bedwell, C. Orndorff, B. Smith, Wallace, John Schilling and Aramark in the manner specified by Rule 4(d). Process shall consist of the complaint filed on June 7, 2019, (docket #2 ), applicable forms (Notice of Lawsuit and Request for Waiver of Service of Summons and Waiver of Service of Summons), and this Entry. The clerk is directed to serve the Indiana Department of Correction employee, J. Schilling, electronically. (See Entry.) Signed by Judge James Patrick Hanlon on 7/22/2019. (DMW) |
Filing 6 RECEIPT #IP065594 for partial filing fee in the amount of $10.00, paid by Plaintiff. (DJH) |
Filing 5 ORDER ON MOTION TO PROCEED IN FORMA PAUPERIS - The plaintiff's motion to proceed in forma pauperis, dkt. #3 , is granted to the extent that the plaintiff is assessed an initial partial filing fee of Ten Dollars ($10.00). The plaintiff shall have through July 9, 2019, in which to pay this sum to the clerk of the district court. (See Order.) Signed by Judge James Patrick Hanlon on 6/12/2019. (DMW) |
Filing 4 MAGISTRATE JUDGE's NOTICE of Availability to Exercise Jurisdiction issued. (REO) |
Filing 3 MOTION for Leave to Proceed in forma pauperis, filed by Plaintiff COREY PERKINS. (Attachments: #1 Exhibit - Statement of Inmate Trust Fund Account)(REO) |
Filing 2 COMPLAINT against ARAMARK, D. BEDWELL, T. BOCH, C. ORNDORFF, J. SCHILLING, SHELDON, B. SMITH, WALLACE, filed by COREY PERKINS. (No fee paid with this filing) (Attachments: #1 Affidavits in support)(REO) (Additional attachment(s) added on 6/10/2019: #2 proposed Notice and Waiver) (REO). |
Filing 1 CONSENT to Prisoner E-Service by COREY PERKINS located at WVCF. Pursuant to General Order 2013-1, documents submitted by COREY PERKINS to the court for filing will generate a Notice of Electronic Filing that will constitute official service upon registered users of CM/ECF. If any parties to the case are not registered CM/ECF users, the Clerk of the Court will mail the document via U.S. Postal Service on behalf of the inmate. NOTE: The E-Filing Program does not affect the obligation of other parties to serve copies of documents in accordance with the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. (REO) |
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.