Alvarez v. Obrien
| Sheila Marie Alvarez |
| Dennis Obrien |
| 8:2021cv00303 |
| August 11, 2021 |
| US District Court for the District of Nebraska |
| Pro Se Docket |
| Richard G Kopf |
| Civil Rights: Other |
| 42 U.S.C. ยง 1983 |
| Plaintiff |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on October 17, 2022. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing 7
ORDER granting #6 Motion for Leave to Proceed in forma pauperis. The Complaint shall be filed without payment of fees. Plaintiff is advised that the next step in her case will be for the court to conduct an initial review of her claims to determine whether summary dismissal is appropriate under 28 U.S.C. 1915(e)(2). The court will conduct this initial review in its normal course of business. Ordered by Senior Judge Richard G. Kopf. (Copy mailed to pro se party) (ADB)
|
| Filing 6 MOTION for Leave to Proceed in forma pauperis on behalf of Plaintiff Sheila Marie Alvarez.(LRM) |
| Filing 5 CORRESPONDENCE on behalf of Plaintiff Sheila Marie Alvarez. (LRM) |
|
Filing 4
ORDER Plaintiff is directed to submit the $402.00 fees to the clerk's office or submit a request to proceed in forma pauperis within 30 days. Failure to take either action will result in dismissal of this matter without further notice. 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: September 16, 2021: Check for MIFP or payment. Ordered by Senior Judge Richard G. Kopf. (Copy mailed to pro se party) (LRM)
|
|
Filing 3
GENERAL ORDER NO. 2020-01: This general order provides for the management and assignment of cases filed by a plaintiff or petitioner without counsel. This general order also includes the definition of the pro se docket, responsibilities of the pro se law clerks and scheduling and discovery requirements in pro se cases. Ordered by Judge John M. Gerrard. (Copy mailed to pro se party)(LRM)
|
| Filing 2 NOTICE by Clerk acknowledging receipt of complaint filed by a pro se party. Copy mailed to pro se party. (LRM) |
| Filing 1 COMPLAINT with jury demand against Dennis Obrien filed on behalf of Sheila Marie Alvarez. ACCESS TO THE PDF DOCUMENT IS RESTRICTED TO CASE PARTICIPANTS AND THE COURT PURSUANT TO FEDERAL RULE OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE 49.1(e). ALL COUNSEL OF RECORD IN MULTI-DEFENDANT CASES MAY ACCESS THIS DOCUMENT. (LRM) Modified on 8/12/2021 to add restricted language (LRM). |
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 Party Aliases
- Associated Cases
- Attorneys
- Case File Location
- Case Summary
- Docket Report
- History/Documents
- Parties
- Related Transactions
- Check Status
| Search for this case: Alvarez v. Obrien | |
|---|---|
| Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
| Search Web | [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ] |
| Plaintiff: Sheila Marie Alvarez | |
| 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 ] |
| Defendant: Dennis Obrien | |
| 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.
