Davidson v. Fulton State Hospital et al
| Dean Bryan Davidson |
| Fulton State Hospital, Southeast Missouri Mental Health Center and State of Missouri |
| 2:2017cv04018 |
| January 25, 2017 |
| US District Court for the Western District of Missouri |
| Jefferson City Office |
| Callaway |
| Fernando J Gaitan |
| Prisoner Pro Se |
| Prisoner: Civil Rights |
| 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights |
| None |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on July 10, 2018. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing 16
ORDER that Plaintiff's motion for order (Doc. #15 ), wherein Plaintiff requests a petition of pro bono and an evidentiary hearing, is denied as legally frivolous. This case was summarily dismissed for failure to state claim. The Eighth Circuit dismissed Plaintiff's subsequent appeal as untimely. Therefore, this case is closed, and no further relief may be granted in this case. Signed on 7/10/2018 by District Judge Fernando J. Gaitan, Jr. This is a TEXT ONLY ENTRY. No document is attached.(Doty, Greg)
|
| Filing 15 PLAINTIFF'S MOTION for order filed by Dean Bryan Davidson. Suggestions in opposition/response due by 7/23/2018. (Attachment: #1 Exhibits) (Richard, Tracey) |
| ***Remark: Copy of docket sheet mailed to Plaintiff upon request for case status. (Richard, Tracey) |
| Filing 14 MANDATE of US COURT OF APPEALS as to #7 Notice of Appeal filed by Dean Bryan Davidson with mandate issued on June 8, 2017. In accordance with the judgment of 05/18/2017, and pursuant to the provisions of Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure 41(a), the formal mandate is hereby issued in the above-styled matter. (Davies, Cindy) |
| Filing 13 PLAINTIFF'S STATEMENT filed by Dean Bryan Davidson. (Richard, Tracey) |
| Filing 12 USCA Judgment as to #7 Notice of Appeal filed by Dean Bryan Davidson. This is a preliminary judgment of U.S. Court of Appeals; jurisdiction is not recovered until the Mandate is issued by the U.S Court of Appeals. The court has carefully reviewed the original file of the United States District Court and orders that this appeal be dismissed as untimely. Appellant's motions to proceed on appeal in forma pauperis are denied as moot. (Davies, Cindy) |
|
Filing 11
ORDER of US COURT OF APPEALS: If the original file of the United States District Court is available for review in electronic format, the court will rely on the electronic version of the record in its review. The appendices required by Eighth Circuit Rule 30A shall not be required. In accordance with Eighth Circuit Local Rule 30A(a)(2), the Clerk of the United States District Court is requested to forward to this Court forthwith any portions of the original record which are not available in an electronic format through PACER, including any documents maintained in paper format or filed under seal, exhibits, CDs, videos, administrative records and state court files. These documents should be submitted within 10 days. (CLERK'S NOTE: All documents pertaining to this case are on CM/ECF. Nothing will be sent to the Court of Appeals.) (Davies, Cindy)
|
|
Filing 10
ORDER of US COURT OF APPEALS: The $505 appellate filing and docketing fee has not been paid and is due. Appellant is directed to either pay the fee in the district court or file a motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis in this court within 28 days of the date of this order. If appellant does not pay the fee or move for IFP status by May 3, 2017, this appeal will be dismissed for failure to prosecute without further notice. (Davies, Cindy)
|
| USCA Case Number from 8th Circuit is 17-1739 for #7 Notice of Appeal filed by Dean Bryan Davidson. (Davies, Cindy) |
| Filing 9 TRANSMISSION of Notice of Appeal Supplement to US Court of Appeals, 8th Circuit via electronic mail. Related document #7 Notice of Appeal. (Davies, Cindy) |
|
Filing 8
ORDER: ORDERED that: (1) Plaintiff is denied leave to proceed in forma pauperis on appeal; (2) Plaintiff either must pay the $505.00 appellate filing and docketing fees or renew his application for leave to proceed in forma pauperis with the United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit within the time set forth in Fed. R. App. P. 24(a) if he seeks to proceed with this appeal; and (3) the Clerk of the Court shall electronically forward this case to the United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit for further processing of Plaintiff's appeal. Signed on March 30, 2017 by District Judge Fernando J. Gaitan, Jr. (Davies, Cindy)
|
| Filing 7 NOTICE OF APPEAL as to #6 Clerk's Judgment and STATEMENT filed by Dean Bryan Davidson. (Davies, Cindy) |
| Filing 6 CLERK'S JUDGMENT: ORDERED that: (1) Plaintiff is granted provisional leave to proceed in forma pauperis; (2) Plaintiff's motion for appointment of counsel (Doc. #3 ) is denied; and (3) this case is summarily dismissed for failure to state a claim. (Thoennes, Cindy) |
|
Filing 5
ORDER: ORDERED that: (1) Plaintiff is granted provisional leave to proceed in forma pauperis; (2) Plaintiff's motion for appointment of counsel (Doc. #3 ) is denied; and (3) this case is summarily dismissed for failure to state a claim. Signed on February 7, 2017 by District Judge Fernando J. Gaitan, Jr. (Thoennes, Cindy)
|
| Filing 3 PLAINTIFF'S MOTION for appointment of counsel filed by Dean Bryan Davidson. (Thoennes, Cindy) |
| Filing 2 IFP FINANCIAL AFFIDAVIT filed by Dean Bryan Davidson. (Thoennes, Cindy) |
| Filing 1 COMPLAINT against All Defendants filed by Dean Bryan Davidson.(Thoennes, Cindy) |
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 Missouri Western 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.
