Randolph v. Graham et al
Plaintiff: Edward Randolph
Defendant: Stephanie Agash, Jane Doe, L. Kalies, John Doe, S.W. Agosh and Harold D. Graham
Case Number: 9:2019cv01161
Filed: September 19, 2019
Court: US District Court for the Northern District of New York
Presiding Judge: Therese Wiley Dancks
Referring Judge: David N Hurd
Nature of Suit: Prisoner: Civil Rights
Cause of Action: 42 U.S.C. ยง 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Jury Demanded By: Plaintiff
Docket Report

This docket was last retrieved on November 30, 2021. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.

Date Filed Document Text
October 25, 2019 Opinion or Order Filing 9 TEXT ORDER REOPENING CASE: This action was administratively closed due to plaintiff's failure to comply with the filing fee requirements, and plaintiff was directed to respond to the Order if he wished to pursue this action. Plaintiff has now responded. The Clerk is directed to reopen this action and restore it to the Court's active docket. Authorized by Judge David N. Hurd on October 25, 2019. (Copy served via regular mail)(rep)
October 25, 2019 Opinion or Order Filing 8 INMATE AUTHORIZATION FORM: Filed by Edward Randolph. (rep)
October 25, 2019 Opinion or Order Filing 7 MOTION for Leave to Proceed in forma pauperis, filed by Edward Randolph. (Attachments: #1 Cover letter and mailing envelope) (rep)
October 4, 2019 Opinion or Order Filing 6 ORDER Directing Administrative Closure with Opportunity to Comply with Filing Fee Requirement: It is hereby ORDERED that plaintiff's IFP application is DENIED as incomplete; and it is further ORDERED that, because this action was not properly commenced, the Clerk is directed to administratively close this action; and it is further ORDERED that, if plaintiff desires to pursue this action, he must, within 30 days of the filing date of this Order, either (1) pay the $400.00 filing fee in full; or (2) submit a completed and signed IFP application. Signed by Judge David N. Hurd on 10/4/2019. (Copy served via regular mail)(meb)
October 3, 2019 Opinion or Order Filing 5 TEXT ORDER: "A document filed on a separate docket may be judicially noticed[.]" Int'l Star Class Yacht Racing Ass'n v. Tommy Hilfiger U.S.A., Inc., 146 F.3d 66, 70 (2d Cir. 1998). In this mater, the Court takes judicial notice that Plaintiff filed a Notice of Change of Address on October 2, 2019, in other cases which he currently has pending in this Court, noting that he was transferred to Great Meadow Correctional Facility. See Notice of Change of Address, ECF Dkt. No. 15, Randolph v. Prieur, No. 9:19-CV-0639. Plaintiff has informed the Court that his address changed, effective September 25, 2019, to P.O. Box 51, Comstock, New York 12821. The Clerk of the Court is directed to modify the docket accordingly. Authorized by Magistrate Judge Therese Wiley Dancks on 10/3/2019. (Copy served via regular mail)(meb)
September 19, 2019 Opinion or Order Filing 4 MOTION: to Appoint Counsel, filed by Edward Randolph.(rep)
September 19, 2019 Opinion or Order Filing 3 INMATE AUTHORIZATION FORM: Filed by Edward Randolph. (rep)
September 19, 2019 Opinion or Order Filing 2 MOTION for Leave to Proceed in forma pauperis, filed by Edward Randolph.(rep)
September 19, 2019 Opinion or Order Filing 1 COMPLAINT WITH JURY DEMAND: against Stephanie Agash, Jane Doe(Therapist/Social Worker, Office of Mental Health), Jane Doe(Therapist/ Social Worker, Office of Mental Health), John Doe, Harold D. Graham, and L. Kalies, filed by Edward Randolph. (Attachments: #1 Copy of USM-285 form, #2 Civil Cover Sheet, #3 Cover Letter, #4 Mailing Envelope)(rep)

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 New York Northern District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: Randolph v. Graham et al
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Defendant: Stephanie Agash
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: Jane Doe
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: L. Kalies
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: John Doe
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: S.W. Agosh
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: Harold D. Graham
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: Edward Randolph
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?