Nelson v. VanHosen et al
| Daniel Nelson and Danny D. Nelson |
| Jane Doe, Ryan Robert, D. Dagostino, RN Kim Doe, Matthew Shepler, Sgt. Kristopher VanHosen, Michael Cook and Sgt. John Doe |
| 9:2020cv00258 |
| March 9, 2020 |
| 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 Civil Rights Act |
| Plaintiff |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on March 1, 2022. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing 7
TEXT ORDER: Plaintiff's letter motion (Dkt. No. #6 ) is granted. The deadline for Plaintiff to submit copies of the complaint for service and four USM 285 forms is reset to June 4, 2020. Authorized by Magistrate Judge Christian F. Hummel on 5/4/2020. (Copy served via regular mail)(meb)
|
| Filing 6 Letter Request for an extension of time to provide copies for service and for four USM-285 forms filed by Daniel Nelson. (Mailing envelope included) (meb) |
| Filing 5 Letter to plaintiff from the court advising that 4 copies of the complaint and completed USM-285s are needed for service by May 4, 2020. (meb) |
|
Filing 4
DECISION AND ORDER: It is hereby ORDERED that Plaintiff's in forma pauperis application (Dkt. No. #2 ) is GRANTED; and it is further ORDERED that the Clerk provide the Superintendent of the facility, designated by Plaintiff as his current location, with a copy of Plaintiff's inmate authorization form, and notify the official that this action has been filed and that Plaintiff is required to pay the entire statutory filing fee of $350.00 pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 1915; and it is further ORDERED that the Clerk of the Court provide a copy of Plaintiff's inmate authorization form to the Financial Deputy of the Clerk's Office; and it is further ORDERED that the claims stated herein are DISMISSED without prejudice; and it is further ORDERED that the claims stated herein survive the Court's sua sponte review and require a response; and it is further ORDERED that Kim Doe, Jane Doe, Sgt. John Doe, and D'Agostino are DISMISSED as defendants herein; and it is further ORDERED that the Clerk shall issue a summonses and forward them, along with copies of the Complaint, to the United States Marshal for service upon the remaining defendants. The Clerk shall forward a copy of the summonses and Complaint to the Office of the Schenectady County Attorney's Office, together with a copy of this Decision and Order; and it is further ORDERED that a response to the Complaint be filed by the remaining defendants, or their counsel, as provided for in the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. Signed by Senior Judge Gary L. Sharpe on 4/2/2020. (Copy served via regular mail)(meb)
|
| Set Deadline: Notice of Compliance Deadline 5/4/2020. (meb) |
| Notification to Superintendent of Filing - Provided Superintendent at Great Meadow Correctional Facility with notice of instant action and a copy of Plaintiff's #3 Inmate Authorization Form. USDC/NYND Finance Dept notified. (meb, ) |
| Filing 3 INMATE AUTHORIZATION FORM filed by Daniel Nelson. (meb) |
| Filing 2 MOTION for Leave to Proceed in forma pauperis filed by Daniel Nelson. (Attachments: #1 Proposed Summons)(meb) |
| Filing 1 COMPLAINT WITH JURY DEMAND against Michael Cook, D. Dagostino, Jane Doe, John Doe, Kim Doe, Ryan Robert, Matthew Shepler, Kristopher VanHosen filed by Daniel Nelson. (Attachments: #1 Mailing envelope)(meb) |
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.
