Cox v. Commissioner Of Department of Human Services et al
| Samuel I. Cox |
| Commissioner Of Department of Human Services, Jane Doe/John Doe and John Doe/Jane Doe |
| 0:2021cv01776 |
| August 3, 2021 |
| US District Court for the District of Minnesota |
| Tony N Leung |
| Susan Richard Nelson |
| Civil Detainee: Conditions of Confinement |
| 42 U.S.C. ยง 1983 |
| None |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on August 8, 2022. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing 5
AMENDED Application to Proceed in District Court without Prepaying Fees or Costs filed by Samuel I. Cox. (Attachments: #1 Cover Letter, #2 Envelope)(MTP)
|
|
Filing 4
ORDER FOR PARTY TO FILE DOCUMENT/RESPOND TO COURT. Signed by Magistrate Judge Tony N. Leung on 8/31/2021. (EB)
|
|
Filing 3
PROPOSED ORDER TO JUDGE re to Show Cause for an Preliminary Injunction & Restraining Order. (NAH) Document QC'd on 8/24/2021 (KDS).
|
|
Filing 2
Application to Proceed in District Court without Prepaying Fees or Costs filed by Samuel I. Cox. (NAH) Document QC'd on 8/24/2021 (KDS).
|
|
Filing 1
COMPLAINT against Commissioner Of Department of Human Services, Jane Doe/John Doe, John Doe/Jane Doe filed by Samuel I. Cox. Case assigned to Judge Susan Richard Nelson and referred to Magistrate Judge Tony N. Leung. (Attachments: #1 Cover Sheet, #2 Envelope) (NAH) Document QC'd on 8/24/2021 (KDS).
|
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 Minnesota 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.
