Scott v. Saline County Sheriff's Department et al
| Maurice Sabba Scott |
| Saline County Sheriff's Department, R. Soldon, S. Fruits and (fnu) Wallace |
| 5:2017cv03064 |
| April 14, 2017 |
| US District Court for the District of Kansas |
| Topeka Office |
| Saline |
| Sam A. Crow |
| David J. Waxse |
| Civil Rights |
| 42 U.S.C. ยง 1983 |
| None |
Follow case documents by RSS
Available Case Documents
The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing
6
ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE ENTERED: Plaintiff is granted to and including May 24, 2017, to show cause why this matter should not be dismissed due to his failure to diligently prosecute this action. Signed by U.S. Senior District Judge Sam A. Crow on 05/09/17. Mailed to pro se party Maurice Sabba Scott by regular mail. (smnd)
|
|
Filing
4
NOTICE AND ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE ENTERED: On or before May 26, 2017, plaintiff shall submit an initial partial filing fee of $9.50 to the clerk of the court. Any objection to this order must be filed on or before the date payment is due. On or before May 26, 2017, plaintiff shall show cause to the Honorable Sam A. Crow why this matter should not be dismissed for failure to state a claim for relief. The failure to file a timely response may result in the dismissal of this action without additional prior notice to the plaintiff. Signed by Magistrate Judge David J. Waxse on 04/25/17. Mailed to pro se party Maurice Sabba Scott by regular mail. (smnd)
|
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 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.
