Metts v. City of St. Louis et al
| Shaun Metts |
| City of St. Louis, City of St. Louis Sheriff's Department, Commissioner Office, James Murphy and Daniel Isom |
| 4:2011cv01828 |
| October 14, 2011 |
| US District Court for the Eastern District of Missouri |
| St. Louis Office |
| St. Louis - County |
| Audrey G. Fleissig |
| Civil Rights |
| 42 U.S.C. ยง 1983 |
| Plaintiff |
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
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Plaintiff's motion to proceed in forma pauperis [Doc. 2] is GRANTED. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Plaintiff shall pay an initial filing fee of $5.39 within thirty (30) days of t he date of this Order. Plaintiff is instructed to make his remittance payable to "Clerk, United States District Court," and to include upon it: (1) his name; (2) his prison registration number; (3) the case number; and (4) that the remittan ce is for an original proceeding. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Clerk shall not issue process or cause process to issue upon the complaint because the complaint is legally frivolous or fails to state a claim upon which relief can be granted, or both. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Plaintiff's motion to appoint counsel [Doc. 4] is DENIED as moot. An Order of Dismissal will accompany this Memorandum and Order. Signed by Honorable Audrey G. Fleissig on 11/3/2011. (NCL)
|
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 Missouri 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.
