Roland v. The County of St. Charles, Missouri et al
| Leo S. Roland |
| The County of St. Charles, Missouri and Nathan Baethke |
| 4:2015cv00966 |
| June 16, 2015 |
| US District Court for the Eastern District of Missouri |
| St. Louis Office |
| St. Charles |
| Ronnie L. White |
| 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
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER: IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the Clerk of Court shall docket this action as Leo Sheron Roland v. County of St. Charles, Missouri. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the second of the two amended complaints [Doc. # 5 , pages 10-15] is STRI CKEN from the record. If plaintiff wishes to pursue the claims set forth therein, he must resubmit the pleading to the Court along with the requisite documents necessary for filing a new and separate civil action, including the filing fee or a mot ion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis and certified inmate account statement. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Clerk shall not issue process or cause process to issue, because the amended complaint [Doc. # 5 , pages 1-9] is legally frivolous and fails to state a claim upon which relief may be granted. See 28 U.S.C. 1915(e)(2)(B). A separate Order of Dismissal shall accompany this Memorandum and Order. Signed by District Judge Ronnie L. White on September 21, 2015. (BRP)
|
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.
