Dieteman v. Douglous Co. Corrections

Justia Dockets & Filings Eighth Circuit Nebraska District Court Dieteman v. Douglous Co. Corrections

Dieteman v. Douglous Co. Corrections

Plaintiff:	Cory Dieteman
Defendant:	Douglous Co. Corrections
Case Number:	8:2012cv00291
Filed:	August 16, 2012
Court:	US District Court for the District of Nebraska
Office:	8 Omaha Office
Presiding Judge:	Pro Se Docket
Presiding Judge:	Richard G. Kopf
Nature of Suit:	Prisoner: Civil Rights
Cause of Action:	42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Jury Demanded By:	Plaintiff

Follow case documents by RSS

Available Case Documents

The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:

Date Filed	Document Text
October 24, 2012	Filing 8 MEMORANDUM AND ORDER - IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that: This matter is dismissed without prejudice for failure to pay the court's filing fee and for failure to comply with a court order. A separate judgment will be entered in accordance with this Memorandum and Order. Ordered by Senior Judge Richard G. Kopf. (Copy mailed to pro se party)(TCL )
September 14, 2012	Filing 6 MEMORANDUM AND ORDER - Plaintiff is directed to correct the above-listed technical defect in the Complaint on or before October 14, 2012. Failure to comply with this Memorandum and Order will result in dismissal of this matter without further noti ce. The Clerk of the court is directed to send to Plaintiff the Form AO240, Application to Proceed Without Prepayment of Fees and Affidavit. The Clerk of the court is directed to set a pro se case management deadline in this matter with the following text: October 14, 2012: Check for MIFP or payment. Ordered by Senior Judge Richard G. Kopf. (Copy mailed to pro se party with AO240 Form)(GJG)

Date Filed

Document Text

October 24, 2012

Filing 8 MEMORANDUM AND ORDER - IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that: This matter is dismissed without prejudice for failure to pay the court's filing fee and for failure to comply with a court order. A separate judgment will be entered in accordance with this Memorandum and Order. Ordered by Senior Judge Richard G. Kopf. (Copy mailed to pro se party)(TCL )

September 14, 2012

Filing 6 MEMORANDUM AND ORDER - Plaintiff is directed to correct the above-listed technical defect in the Complaint on or before October 14, 2012. Failure to comply with this Memorandum and Order will result in dismissal of this matter without further noti ce. The Clerk of the court is directed to send to Plaintiff the Form AO240, Application to Proceed Without Prepayment of Fees and Affidavit. The Clerk of the court is directed to set a pro se case management deadline in this matter with the following text: October 14, 2012: Check for MIFP or payment. Ordered by Senior Judge Richard G. Kopf. (Copy mailed to pro se party with AO240 Form)(GJG)

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 Nebraska District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: Dieteman v. Douglous Co. Corrections
Search News	[ Google News \| Marketwatch \| Wall Street Journal \| Financial Times \| New York Times ]
Search Web	[ Unicourt \| Legal Web \| Google \| Bing \| Yahoo \| Ask ]
Defendant: Douglous Co. Corrections
Search News	[ Google News \| Marketwatch \| Wall Street Journal \| Financial Times \| New York Times ]
Search Finance	[ Google Finance \| Yahoo Finance \| Hoovers \| SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web	[ Unicourt \| Justia Dockets \| Legal Web \| Google \| Bing \| Yahoo \| Ask ]
Plaintiff: Cory Dieteman
Search News	[ Google News \| Marketwatch \| Wall Street Journal \| Financial Times \| New York Times ]
Search Finance	[ Google Finance \| Yahoo Finance \| Hoovers \| SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web	[ Unicourt \| Justia Dockets \| Legal Web \| Google \| Bing \| Yahoo \| Ask ]

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.

Why Is My Information Online?