Young v. Mendenhall et al

Young v. Mendenhall et al

Plaintiff:	David Lamont Young, II
Defendant:	Danetta F. Mendenhall and Michael J. Bartee
Case Number:	5:2010cv03246
Filed:	December 6, 2010
Court:	US District Court for the District of Kansas
Office:	Topeka Office
County:	Johnson
Presiding Judge:	Sam A. Crow
Nature of Suit:	Prison Condition
Cause of Action:	42 U.S.C. § 1983
Jury Demanded By:	None

Follow case documents by RSS

Available Case Documents

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

Date Filed	Document Text
February 25, 2011	Filing 6 MEMORANDUM AND ORDER ENTERED: Plaintiff's motion 2 for leave to proceed in forma pauperis is granted. This matter is dismissed for failure to state a claim up on which relief may be granted. Signed by Senior District Judge Sam A. Crow on 2/25/2011. (Mailed to pro se party David Lamont Young, II by regular mail.) (smnd)
January 4, 2011	Filing 4 MEMORANDUM AND ORDER ENTERED: On or before February 4, 2011, plaintiff shall submit an initial partial filing fee of $5.00. Any objection to this order must be filed on or before the date payment is due. On or before February 4, 2011, plaintif f shall show cause why this matter should not be dismissed for failure to state a claim upon which relief may be granted. The failure to file a timely response may result in the dismissal of this action without prejudice and without additional prior notice to the plaintiff. Signed by Senior District Judge Sam A. Crow on 1/4/2011. (Mailed to pro se party David Lamont Young, II by regular mail.) (smnd)

Date Filed

Document Text

February 25, 2011

Filing 6 MEMORANDUM AND ORDER ENTERED: Plaintiff's motion 2 for leave to proceed in forma pauperis is granted. This matter is dismissed for failure to state a claim up on which relief may be granted. Signed by Senior District Judge Sam A. Crow on 2/25/2011. (Mailed to pro se party David Lamont Young, II by regular mail.) (smnd)

January 4, 2011

Filing 4 MEMORANDUM AND ORDER ENTERED: On or before February 4, 2011, plaintiff shall submit an initial partial filing fee of $5.00. Any objection to this order must be filed on or before the date payment is due. On or before February 4, 2011, plaintif f shall show cause why this matter should not be dismissed for failure to state a claim upon which relief may be granted. The failure to file a timely response may result in the dismissal of this action without prejudice and without additional prior notice to the plaintiff. Signed by Senior District Judge Sam A. Crow on 1/4/2011. (Mailed to pro se party David Lamont Young, II by regular mail.) (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: Young v. Mendenhall et al
Search News	[ Google News \| Marketwatch \| Wall Street Journal \| Financial Times \| New York Times ]
Search Web	[ Unicourt \| Legal Web \| Google \| Bing \| Yahoo \| Ask ]
Plaintiff: David Lamont Young, II
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: Danetta F. Mendenhall
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: Michael J. Bartee
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?