GUILMETTE v. STEVENSON et al
| DOUGLAS A. GUILMETTE |
| STEVENSON, BREWER, COAKLEY, LEFFLER and STUPPY |
| 2:2022cv00413 |
| September 21, 2022 |
| US District Court for the Southern District of Indiana |
| Doris L Pryor |
| James R Sweeney |
| Prisoner Petitions - Prison Condition |
| 42 U.S.C. ยง 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights |
| Plaintiff |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on November 16, 2022. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Filing 13 AMENDED COMPLAINT against All Defendants, filed by DOUGLAS A. GUILMETTE.(AAS) |
| Filing 12 MOTION for Leave to Proceed in forma pauperis, filed by Plaintiff DOUGLAS A. GUILMETTE. (Attachments: #1 Exhibit)(AAS) |
Filing 11
ORDER denying #10 Motion to Amend Complaint to Include First Amendment Violation. The clerk is directed to send to him a blank pro se civil complaint form along with this copy of this Order. (SEE ORDER.) Signed by Judge James R. Sweeney II on 10/28/2022. (Attachments: #1 Blank Complaint Form) (TPS)
|
| Filing 10 MOTION to Amend Complaint to Include First Amendment Violation, filed by Plaintiff DOUGLAS A. GUILMETTE. (KAA) |
|
Filing 9
ORDER granting #7 Motion for Leave to Proceed in forma pauperis. Although the plaintiff is excused from pre-paying the full filing fee, he still must pay the three hundred and fifty dollar ($350.00) filing fee. The assessment of even an initial partial filing fee is waived because the plaintiff has no assets and no means by which to pay a partial filing fee. Accordingly, no initial partial filing fee is due at this time. Signed by Judge James R. Sweeney II on 10/5/2022. (KAA)
|
| Filing 8 CONSENT to Jurisdiction to US Magistrate Judge by DOUGLAS A. GUILMETTE. ( (JRB) Modified on 10/4/2022 (KAA). |
| Filing 7 MOTION for Leave to Proceed in forma pauperis, filed by Plaintiff DOUGLAS A. GUILMETTE. (Attachments: #1 Exhibit)(JRB) |
| 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. (MEH) |
|
Filing 5
ORDER denying as presented #3 Motion for Leave to Proceed in forma pauperis. Mr. Guilmette's trust account history that accompanies his motion is not current. Mr. Guilmette shall have through October 21, 2022, in which to renew his motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis.(SEE ORDER.) Signed by Judge James R. Sweeney II on 9/21/2022. (TPS)
|
| Filing 4 MAGISTRATE JUDGE's NOTICE of Availability to Exercise Jurisdiction issued. (KAA) |
| Filing 3 MOTION for Leave to Proceed in forma pauperis, filed by Plaintiff DOUGLAS A. GUILMETTE. (Attachments: #1 Exhibits)(KAA) |
| Filing 2 COMPLAINT against BREWER, COAKLEY, LEFFLER, STEVENSON, STUPPY, filed by DOUGLAS A. GUILMETTE. (No fee paid with this filing) (KAA) |
| Filing 1 CONSENT to Prisoner E-Service by DOUGLAS A. GUILMETTE located at WVCF. Pursuant to General Order 2013-1, documents submitted by DOUGLAS A. GUILMETTE 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. (KAA) |
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.
