Chomos v. Brown et al
| Mark A. Chomos |
| Jane Doe, Isard, C. Batho, J. Clark, Meehan, Babcock, Hamilton, C. Brown, Greenleaf, John Doe 2, McCollum, Hansen, J. Miller, Woodard, M. McLean, JOHN DOE 1 and Harrison |
| 2:2019cv11042 |
| April 10, 2019 |
| US District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan |
| Bernard A Friedman |
| R Steven Whalen |
| Prisoner: Civil Rights |
| Plaintiff |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on April 12, 2019. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Filing 6 JUDGMENT in favor of Defendants against Plaintiff. Signed by District Judge Bernard A. Friedman. (JCur) |
Filing 5
ORDER Dismissing the Complaint #1 and denying as moot plaintiff's #2 Application for Leave to Proceed In Forma Pauperis with Certificate of Service. Signed by District Judge Bernard A. Friedman. (JCur)
|
| TEXT-ONLY CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE re #6 Judgment, #5 Order Dismissing Case on Mark A. Chomos Pris. No. 287880, Mac Correctional Facility 34625 26 Mile Rd, Lenox, MI 48048-3002 (JCur) |
| Filing 4 NOTICE of Mediation Program (NAhm) |
| Filing 3 Ex Parte MOTION for the Court's Analysis of Whether these Defendants Should Be Represented by the Michigan Attorney General by Mark A. Chomos. (NAhm) |
| Filing 2 APPLICATION to Proceed without prepaying fees or costs by Mark A. Chomos. (NAhm) |
| Filing 1 COMPLAINT filed by Mark A. Chomos against All Defendants (Attachments: #1 Document Continuation, #2 Document Continuation) (NAhm) |
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 Michigan Eastern 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.
