Clemens v. Nevada Department of Corrections et al
Dave Clemens |
Nevada Department of Corrections, K. LeGrand and T. Garrett |
3:2023cv00035 |
January 25, 2023 |
US District Court for the District of Nevada |
Craig S Denney |
Miranda M Du |
Prisoner: Civil Rights |
42 U.S.C. ยง 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights |
Plaintiff |
Docket Report
This docket was last retrieved on April 23, 2024. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
Document Text |
---|
Filing 10 LIMITED NOTICE of Appearance by attorney Victoria Charlene Corey on behalf of Interested Party Nevada Department of Corrections. for Purposes of Participation in the Early Mediation Program (Corey, Victoria) |
Filing 9 MOTION to Amend re ECF Nos. #5 Complaint, #6 Complaint by Plaintiff Dave Clemens. Responses due by 3/30/2023. (Attachments: #1 Proposed Amended Complaint)(CJS) (pleading) |
Filing 8 ORDER: The court has received Plaintiff's "request for interpreter" for mediation. (ECF No. #7 .) Plaintiff is not actually asking for an interpreter. It appears Plaintiff is asking that the inmate who helped him prepare the civil rights complaint in his case be allowed to assist in the inmate mediation with him because Plaintiff does not understand "legal[e]se language." Under these circumstances, the court will permit Plaintiff to have the assistance of inmate Timothy H. Johnson (#23766) at Lovelock Correctional Center to help Plaintiff at the mediation in this case. The inmate helper, however, may not serve as counsel or advocate for Plaintiff at the mediation. Signed by Magistrate Judge Craig S. Denney on 3/14/2023. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - HJ) |
Filing 7 MOTION Request for Interpreter by Plaintiff Dave Clemens. Responses due by 3/27/2023. (CJS) (misc) (settlement) |
Filing 6 COMPLAINT against T. Garrett, K. LeGrand, Nevada Department of Corrections by Dave Clemens. (Appears to be duplicate image of ECF No. #5 .) (CJS) |
Filing 5 COMPLAINT by Dave Clemens. (Filed pursuant to ECF No. #4 Order. Copy to P; E-service to AG) (DRM) |
Filing 4 SCREENING ORDER - A decision on ECF No. #1 IFP application is deferred. Clerk is directed to file the complaint (ECF No. #1 -1) and send Plaintiff a courtesy copy. (Attached hereto for distribution to P via LCC law library.) Plaintiff must file a signed copy of the Complaint within 30 days (3/31/2023). Claims will proceed or are dismissed as detailed herein. Defendant NDOC is dismissed from the entirety of the case with prejudice, This action is STAYED 90 days to allow parties to settle. 90-day report due by 5/31/2023. If case does not settle, Plaintiff will be required to pay the full filing fee. Clerk is directed add the Nevada Department of Corrections to the docket as an Interested Party and e-serve a copy of this order, and copy of the complaint on the AG. (E-service 3/2/2023; Complaint served upon subsequent filing.) AG shall advise by 3/23/2023 re acceptance of service for the purpose of participation in the Early Mediation Program. Signed by Chief Judge Miranda M. Du on 3/1/2023. (Attachments: #1 Copy of Complaint for Plaintiff)(Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - DRM) |
Filing 3 NOTICE - Signed Page 6 of Complaint by Dave Clemens re #1 -1 Complaint. (CJS) Modified on 1/30/2023; NEF regenerated (CJS). |
Filing 2 ADVISORY LETTER to litigant. (CJS) |
Filing 1 MOTION/APPLICATION for Leave to Proceed in forma pauperis by Plaintiff Dave Clemens. (Attachments: #1 Complaint)(CJS) |
Case randomly assigned to Chief Judge Miranda M. Du and Magistrate Judge Craig S. Denney. (CJS) |
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 Nevada 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.