Wilson v. Spink et al
| Hasson Wilson |
| Caberra and J. Spink |
| 9:2019cv01322 |
| October 29, 2019 |
| US District Court for the Northern District of New York |
| Christian F Hummel |
| Gary L Sharpe |
| Prisoner: Civil Rights |
| 42 U.S.C. ยง 1983 |
| Plaintiff |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on December 19, 2019. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Filing 6 JUDGMENT entered dismissing the action pursuant to the Decision and Order dated 12/18/19 and filed 12/19/19 of Judge Sharpe.{judgment served via regular mail on plaintiff} (nas) |
Filing 5
DECISION AND ORDER: ORDERED that plaintiff's IFP Application (Dkt. No. #2 ) is DENIED as moot. ORDERED that plaintiff's Letter Motion (Dkt. No. #4 ) is DENIED as moot. ORDERED that this action is DISMISSED without prejudice as duplicative of Wilson v. Spink, No. 9:19-CV-1294 (DNH/ATB). The Clerk is directed to close this action. Signed by Senior Judge Gary L. Sharpe on 12/18/19. {order served via regular mail on plaintiff}(nas)
|
| Filing 4 Letter Motion from Hasson Wilson requesting to have the complaint in 19-cv-1322 filed in 19-cv-1294. (nas, ) |
| Filing 3 INMATE AUTHORIZATION FORM by Hasson Wilson. (nas) |
| Filing 2 MOTION for Leave to Proceed in forma pauperis filed by Hasson Wilson.(nas, ) |
| Filing 1 COMPLAINT against Caberra, J. Spink filed by Hasson Wilson.(nas ) |
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 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.
