ALLEN v. DOE 1-4 et al
| DAVID ALLEN and DAVID HOLDER |
| JOHN DOE 1-4 and JOHN DOE |
| 2:2020cv00100 |
| February 24, 2020 |
| US District Court for the Southern District of Indiana |
| Mark J Dinsmore |
| James Patrick Hanlon |
| Prisoner: Civil Rights |
| 42 U.S.C. ยง 1983 |
| None |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on May 9, 2022. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing 5
MAGISTRATE JUDGE's NOTICE of Availability to Exercise Jurisdiction issued. (DWH)
|
|
Filing 4
Case transferred in from District of Indiana Northern; Case Number 4:20-cv-00010. Original file copy of transfer order and docket sheet received.
|
|
Filing 3
ORDER: The Court TRANSFERS this case to the United States District Court for the Southern District of Indiana. Signed by Senior Judge James T Moody on 2/20/2020. (Copy mailed to pro se party) (lhc) [Transferred from Indiana Northern on 2/24/2020.]
|
|
Filing 2
MOTION for Leave to Proceed in forma pauperis (Prisoner Trust Account Ledger attached) by Plaintiff David Allen. (Attachments: #1 Envelope)(mlc) [Transferred from Indiana Northern on 2/24/2020.]
|
|
Filing 1
PRO SE COMPLAINT against John Doe(Nursing Staff), John Doe(SIRT Team Officers Supervisor), John Doe 1-4, filed by David Allen. (Attachments: #1 Letter, #2 Proposed Summons, #3 USM 285, #4 Envelope)(mlc) [Transferred from Indiana Northern on 2/24/2020.]
|
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.
