ADAMS v. AROOSTOOK COUNTY SHERIFFS DEPT et al
| HERBERT M ADAMS, IV |
| AROOSTOOK COUNTY SHERIFFS DEPT, SHAWN GILLEN, GRAIG CLOSSEY, RONALD OLDFIELD and ALISON WILLETTE |
| 1:2023cv00108 |
| February 28, 2023 |
| US District Court for the District of Maine |
| JOHN C NIVISON |
| GEORGE Z SINGAL |
| Prisoner: Civil Rights |
| 42 U.S.C. ยง 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights |
| None |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on June 26, 2023. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing 5
MAIL (Order to Show Cause (ECF No. 4)) sent to Herbert Adams returned as undeliverable. Reason: Return to sender, not deliverable as addressed, unable to forward. (lrt)
|
|
Filing 4
ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE. Show Cause Response due by 4/18/2023. By MAGISTRATE JUDGE JOHN C. NIVISON. (MFS)
|
|
Filing 3
ORDER granting #2 Motion to Proceed Without Prepayment of Fees and Costs. Plaintiff's intent to proceed due 3/23/2023. By MAGISTRATE JUDGE JOHN C. NIVISON. (MFS)
|
|
Set Deadlines: Prisoner Intent to Proceed Deadline 3/23/2023. (MFS)
|
|
Filing 2
MOTION to Proceed Without Prepayment of Fees and Costs by HERBERT M ADAMS, IV (jwr)
|
|
Filing 1
COMPLAINT against AROOSTOOK COUNTY SHERIFFS DEPT, GRAIG CLOSSEY, SHAWN GILLEN, RONALD OLDFIELD, ALISON WILLETTE, filed by HERBERT M ADAMS, IV. (Service of Process Deadline 5/30/2023) (Attachments: #1 Statement of Claim, #2 Envelope 1, #3 Envelope 2)(jwr)
|
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 Maine 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.
