Lozowski v. Iowa Department of Corrections et al
| Robert Eugene Lozowski |
| Iowa Department of Corrections, William Heinrick, Beth Skinner and Chad Kerker |
| H. Loraine Wallace |
| 4:2023cv00155 |
| May 10, 2023 |
| US District Court for the Southern District of Iowa |
| Helen C Adams |
| Stephen H Locher |
| Prisoner: Civil Rights |
| 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights |
| None |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on July 7, 2023. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Filing 16 JUDGMENT of USCA advising the judgement of the district court is Affirmed as to #9 Notice of Appeal filed by Robert Eugene Lozowski. Mandate to issue in 14 days. (Attachments: #1 Cover Letter) (vr) |
Filing 15
ORDER of USCA to submit documents as to #9 Notice of Appeal filed by Robert Eugene Lozowski. (vr)
|
|
Filing 14
ORDER of USCA as to #9 Notice of Appeal filed by Robert Eugene Lozowski. (vr)
|
| Filing 13 USCA Case Number 23-2461 for #9 Notice of Appeal filed by Robert Eugene Lozowski. (vr) |
| Filing 12 NOTIFICATION OF APPEAL and NOA Supplement by District Court Clerk to USCA re #9 Notice of Appeal filed on 6/16/2023. (vr) |
|
Filing 11
TEXT ORDER granting #10 Motion for Leave to Appeal in forma pauperis. Signed by Judge Stephen H. Locher on 6/16/2023. (mm)
|
| Filing 10 MOTION for Leave to Appeal in forma pauperis by Robert Eugene Lozowski. (btg) |
| Filing 9 NOTICE OF APPEAL as to #6 Judgment, #5 Order,, by Robert Eugene Lozowski. (btg) |
|
Filing 8
TEXT ORDER: Based upon the previous Order #5 dismissing this case, the #7 Motion to Appoint Counsel is denied as moot. Signed by Judge Stephen H. Locher on 6/14/2023. (mm)
|
| Filing 7 MOTION to Appoint Counsel by Robert Eugene Lozowski.Motions referred to Helen C. Adams. Responses due by 6/9/2023. (btg) |
| Filing 6 JUDGMENT in favor of Iowa Department of Corrections, Beth Skinner, Chad Kerker, William Heinrick against Robert Eugene Lozowski. Signed by Clerk John S. Courter on 5/25/2023. (btg) |
|
Filing 5
INITIAL REVIEW ORDER dismissing case and granting #1 Motion to Proceed in forma pauperis. See Order for particulars. The Court assesses the Plaintiff no initial partial filing fee, and the $350.00 fee owed shall be paid to the Clerk of Court from the prisoners account in accordance with 28 U.S.C. 1915(b). Because Plaintiff is proceeding in forma pauperis, he is not assessed the $52.00 administrative fee. A notice of this obligation shall be sent to the appropriate prison official. Signed by Judge Stephen H. Locher on 5/24/2023. Copy of order mailed to pro se plaintiff by chambers. (mm)
|
| Filing 4 Case transferred in from District of Iowa Northern; Case Number 1:23-cv-00029. Original file |
| Filing 3 PRO SE COMPLAINT against All Defendants by Robert Eugene Lozowski (NEF to Plaintiff) (des) |
|
Filing 2
ORDER of Case Transfer to the Southern District of Iowa. The Clerks office shall file the complaint without the prepayment of fees and costs for the purpose of transferring the case. Signed by Chief Judge Leonard T Strand on 5/10/2023. (Copy to Plaintiff, Case electronically transferred to District of Southern District of Iowa) (des)
|
| Judge Stephen H. Locher and Chief Magistrate Judge Helen C. Adams added. (kjw) |
| Filing 1 PRO SE MOTION for Leave to Proceed in forma pauperis by Plaintiff Robert Eugene Lozowski. (Attachments: #1 1983 Complaint)(PSLC)(NEF to Plaintiff) (ksy) |
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 Iowa 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.
