Kyles v. State of Nebraska
James E. Kyles |
State of Nebraska |
8:2022cv00290 |
August 12, 2022 |
US District Court for the District of Nebraska |
Joseph F Bataillon |
Pro Se Docket |
Civil Rights: Other |
42 U.S.C. ยง 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights |
Plaintiff |
Docket Report
This docket was last retrieved on August 23, 2022. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
Document Text |
---|
Filing 7 JUDGMENT - PRO SE regarding Memorandum and Order #6 . To the extent the Notice of Removal filed herein may be construed as a civil complaint, it is dismissed without prejudice for the reasons stated in the Memorandum and Order entered this date. To the extent James E. Kyles is requesting removal of a criminal case to this Court, his request is denied, and the case is remanded to the County Court of Douglas County, Nebraska. (Attachments: #1 Notice - Civil Appeals in Pro Se Cases) Ordered by Senior Judge Joseph F. Bataillon. (Copy mailed to pro se party)(MKR) |
Filing 6 MEMORANDUM AND ORDER - Kyles' Motion to Proceed In Forma Pauperis, Filing No. #3 , is granted. To the extent Kyles' Notice of Removal may be construed as a civil complaint, it is dismissed without prejudice for lack of jurisdiction and for failure to state a claim upon which relief may be granted. To the extent Kyle is requesting removal of his state criminal case to this Court, his request is denied, and this case is remanded to the County Court of Douglas County, Nebraska. Judgment shall be entered by separate document and the Clerk of the Court shall close this file for statistical purposes. The Clerk of the Court shall send a copy of this Memorandum and Order and of the Judgment to the Clerk of the County Court of Douglas County, Nebraska. Ordered by Senior Judge Joseph F. Bataillon. (Copy mailed/e-mailed to pro se party)(MKR) |
Filing 5 GENERAL ORDER NO. 2022-04: 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 Chief Judge Robert F. Rossiter, Jr. (Copy mailed to pro se party)(TCL) |
Filing 4 NOTICE by Clerk acknowledging receipt of complaint filed by a pro se party. (TCL) |
Filing 3 MOTION for Leave to Proceed in forma pauperis on behalf of Plaintiff James E. Kyles.(TCL) |
Filing 2 NOTICE of Filing And Service of Notice of Removal of State Court Action to United States District Court on behalf of Plaintiff James E. Kyles. (TCL) |
Filing 1 COMPLAINT with jury demand against State of Nebraska. No Summons issued, filed on behalf of pro se plaintiffJames E. Kyles. (TCL) |
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: Kyles v. State of Nebraska | |
---|---|
Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
Search Web | [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ] |
Plaintiff: James E. Kyles | |
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: State of Nebraska | |
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.