Lane v. Carty
Plaintiff: Ross Preston Lane
Defendant: Daniel Carty
Case Number: 5:2009cv03153
Filed: July 14, 2009
Court: US District Court for the District of Kansas
Office: Topeka Office
County: Butler
Presiding Judge: Sam A. Crow
Nature of Suit: Plaintiff
Cause of Action: 42 U.S.C. ยง 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Jury Demanded By: Plaintiff

Available Case Documents

The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:

Date Filed Document Text
September 28, 2009 Opinion or Order Filing 4 MEMORANDUM AND ORDER ENTERED: Plaintiff is given thirty (30) days in which to file a Supplement to his Complaint containing sufficient additional facts to state a federal constitutional claim. Plaintiff's motion 2 for leave to proceed in forma pauperis is granted. Signed by Senior District Judge Sam A. Crow on 09/28/09. (smnd)
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 Kansas District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: Lane v. Carty
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Plaintiff: Ross Preston Lane
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Finance [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Defendant: Daniel Carty
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Finance [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]

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.


Why Is My Information Online?