Robinson v. Lancaster County Department of Corrections et al
| Rodney Robinson |
| Lancaster County Department of Corrections and Michael Kinney |
| 4:2008cv03149 |
| July 14, 2008 |
| US District Court for the District of Nebraska |
| Prisoner: Civil Rights Office |
| Platte |
| Joseph F. Bataillon |
| Pro Se Docket |
| Plaintiff |
| Federal Question |
| 42:1983 Prisoner Civil Rights |
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
12
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER that Plaintiff failed to respond to the court's September 3, 2008 Memorandum and Order requiring that he provide the court with a current address; this action is therefore dismissed without prejudice and all pending motions are denied as moot; a separate judgment will be entered in accordance with this Memorandum and Order.Ordered by Chief Judge Joseph F. Bataillon. (copy mailed to pro se party)(CJP)
|
|
Filing
10
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER that plaintiff shall have until September 30, 2008 to apprise the court of his current address, in the absence of which this case will be dismissed without prejudice and without further notice; the Clerk of the court is directed to set a pro se case management deadline in this case using the following text: September 30, 2008: deadline for informing court of new address.Ordered by Chief Judge Joseph F. Bataillon. (copy mailed to pro se party)(CJP)
|
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 Nebraska 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.
