Newsome v. Warren et al
| Thomas Newsome |
| Jhon Doe #4, Jhon Doe #3, Christopher Mears, Jhon Doe #2, Ms. Lovely Warren, Jhon Doe #5 ID# oGDO886, Gary Penders, Micheal Ciminelli and Jhon Doe #1 ID # 1847 |
| 6:2018cv06756 |
| October 19, 2018 |
| US District Court for the Western District of New York |
| Charles J Siragusa |
| Prisoner: Civil Rights |
| 42 U.S.C. ยง 1983 |
| Plaintiff |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on April 23, 2021. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Filing 2 MOTION for Leave to Proceed in forma pauperis by Thomas Newsome. (JHF) |
| Filing 1 COMPLAINT against Micheal Ciminelli, Jhon Doe #1 ID # 1847, Jhon Doe #2, Jhon Doe #3, Jhon Doe #4, Jhon Doe #5 ID# oGDO886, Christopher Mears, Gary Penders, Lovely Warren, filed by Thomas Newsome. (Attachments: #1 Civil Cover Sheet, #2 Envelope) (JHF) |
| Prisoner Pro Se Packet consisting of Privacy Notice, Consent to Proceed Before a Magistrate Judge and Civil Case Timeline mailed to plaintiff. (JHF) |
| Notice of Availability of Magistrate Judge: A United States Magistrate of this Court is available to conduct all proceedings in this civil action in accordance with 28 U.S.C. 636c and FRCP 73. The Notice, Consent, and Reference of a Civil Action to a Magistrate Judge form (AO-85) is available for download at http://www.uscourts.gov/services-forms/forms. (JHF) |
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 Western 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.
